Crosby B.C., Bryson J.M. - Leadership for the Common Good (2005)(en)
.pdfDEVELOPING AN EFFECTIVE PROBLEM DEFINITION TO GUIDE ACTION 239
Final Report
After review and revision of the draft report, the coordinating committee should decide whether the final report is to be widely disseminated or simply remain a working document until combined with the results of the next phase into a single report that defines the problem and recommends specific solutions. If the committee decides to publish the report, the committee should think carefully about how to present it so that stakeholders commit to efforts to overcome the problem and achieve a better future. The report may need to be prepared in versions tailored to specific audiences; usually the design of the report should be attention-getting and accessible. Various art forms may be used to enact, dramatize, or “real-ize” the interpretation of the report’s findings. For example, to dramatize the problem of domestic abuse in the United States, organizers of the Silent Witness Project displayed life-size silhouettes representing women who had been killed by their abusers. Another group demonstrated the human toll of handguns by lining up row after row of empty pairs of shoes to represent all the men, women, and children who had been killed with handguns in a year. An Israeli-Palestinian peace group displays coffins at its presentations to remind the audience of deaths resulting from the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Art can also be celebratory and suggest that policy entrepreneurs’ desired outcomes are being, or might be, achieved. For example, a mural might depict sustainable development, a film might portray strong African American families, or an exhibit could highlight older adults’ contributions to their community.
Media Strategy
The release of the report is an occasion for attracting media attention to the problem and efforts to do something about it. Publication of the report may also be timed to coincide with some other event, such as the Earth Summit in the World Business Council case. Change advocates should supply interested journalists with background data, human interest angles, and promising leads. The difficulty may lie in sustaining media attention; in the AIDS case, for example, in the summer of 1982 CBS Evening News carried a major story featuring Bobbi Campbell, Larry Kramer, and public health official Jim Curran. Host Dan Rather noted that federal officials were calling the disease an epidemic. Anti-AIDS campaigners
240 LEADERSHIP FOR THE COMMON GOOD
might have expected major newspapers, magazines, and broadcasters to follow up with intensive coverage, but they did not. Newsweek finally carried a cover story on the disease in April 1983.
Strategize about how to keep the problem concerning you in the news and how to tell the causal story that supports needed change. Because so many citizens depend on the mass news media for information, they may think that because a problem is not in the news very often it is sporadic and thus not important; moreover, their understanding of the problem is likely to be superficial since news reports don’t generally highlight the causes of a problem (Rochefort and Cobb, 1994).
Caveats for Policy Entrepreneurs
Four cautions are called for. First, remember that the term problem can be problematic. Use language that empowers people to take responsible action to improve their situation. If problem induces a sense of oppression and defeat, use another term, such as challenge or opportunity. Just be sure, however, to articulate these challenges or opportunities through an inclusive and motivating interpretive scheme.
Second, remember that this phase—like every phase—can be overdone as well as underdone. Make sure that your group has done enough research and analysis to understand the problem in depth and develop an optimal problem frame. Avoid the temptation to study the problem to death since it is probably worsening anyway, and since supporters may lose some of their enthusiasm if the research drags on.
Third, do not promise stakeholders that all their problems will be solved. Such a promise, whether explicit or implied, might yield a gain in participation in the problem-formulation phase, but it is almost certain to doom policy change efforts later when those expectations are not met.
Fourth, remember that you may need to repeat parts of this phase. As you attempt to win over more stakeholders, or as new aspects of the problem emerge, your group may have to do additional research and analysis. Winning over new stakeholders can require further assurance that problems have been objectively studied; problem frames might need to be refined. At the same time,
DEVELOPING AN EFFECTIVE PROBLEM DEFINITION TO GUIDE ACTION 241
there is a limit to how much additional agreement you can achieve through more extensive problem-formulation efforts. Sometimes, your group must decide to proceed without the support of some key stakeholders.
Summary
Public problems become real when vocal and powerful people see a gap between what exists and what they think can and should be done about it. The gap is not necessarily between some ideal and reality; more often, it is simply a gap between reality and what people think they can reasonably have (Wildavsky, 1979; Nutt, 2002). How a situation is framed in the first place has the most powerful impact on how a problem is defined. Beyond that, categorization, value judgments, indicators, comparison, focusing events, and feedback also influence what is and is not considered a problem. This chapter has described how policy entrepreneurs use the problem-formulation phase to promote a shared awareness of a public problem among diverse stakeholders. As part of this phase, these entrepreneurs work with a developing advocacy coalition to present multi-faceted problem definitions that can generate widespread support for change. They also help the coalition impart a direction and plan for the solution-search phase, which is described in the next phase.
A number of benefits flow from successful problem-formulation efforts. The first is simply shared recognition and appreciation of problems and needs among a broader group of stakeholders. Second, extensive and careful problem-formulation efforts constitute a basis for effectively addressing real stakeholder concerns, and problem statements afford a rallying point. Third, in the absence of extensive and careful problem-formulation efforts, leaders never really know whether they are addressing hearsay or suspicion, vested interests, or a widely shared sense of a real need. Fourth, extensive problem-formulation efforts by change advocates avoid overreliance on technical experts, who all too often see the problem purely through the lens of their expertise. Fifth, successful problem formulation generates detailed criteria for the search for solutions. Finally, the problem statement develops a useful tension among stakeholders and an implied threat of dire consequences if nothing is done.
Chapter Eight
Searching for
Solutions in Forums
Every time we hear that a possible solution simply cannot be done, we may be sure on general scientific grounds that it can. Every time we hear that a solution is not economic, we ought to ask: “for whom?”
STAFFORD BEER
We aren’t lacking solutions. What we lack is the will to implement them.
MARGARET WHEATLEY
In the search-for-solutions phase, successful policy entrepreneurs use the problem definition developed in the previous phase to guide efforts to find and evaluate promising solutions. They engage stakeholders in conducting research, organizing effective forums, and championing solution ideas that can attract the support of executive, legislative, and administrative decision makers in subsequent phases. Once this phase is completed, these leaders and their supporters should have articulated a visible public issue, a public problem attached to one or more promising solutions that have pros and cons from the standpoint of key stakeholders.
Purpose and Desired Outcomes
The search-for-solutions phase of the policy change cycle has two main purposes: finding or creating solutions that effectively remedy the problem identified in the previous phase, and capturing
242
SEARCHING FOR SOLUTIONS IN FORUMS 243
enough public attention to place the problem and its potential so- lutions—the issue, in other words—on the public agenda. In this phase, policy entrepreneurs continue the work of constructing and communicating a collective vision (or direction) for improving the world. In effect, they are facilitating construction of alternative scenarios for moving from the problem-laden present, through implementing certain strategies, to a relatively problem-free future.
The problem-formulation phase turned a condition into a public problem; this phase turns a problem into an issue—a problem connected to at least one solution that has pros and cons from the viewpoint of various stakeholders. Creating an issue is the prime desired outcome of the search for solutions, but there are others:
•Development of one or more conceptual frameworks for understanding the issue
•Identification of the goals and key components of a highquality solution
•Enhancement of the quality, legitimacy, and prestige of the policy change endeavor
•Efficient use of people’s time and other resources
•Placement of the issue on the public agenda
•Expanded advocacy coalition
Creation of a Public Issue
Policy entrepreneurs seek high-quality solutions that can attract the support of an array of stakeholders and that are capable of remedying the problem defined in the previous phase. They are adept in predicting how stakeholders will respond to the proposed solutions and thus able to help an advocacy coalition think through the politics surrounding a specific proposal for enacting these solutions.
The politics surrounding public issues may be of several main types: what James Wilson and John DiIulio (1998) call majoritarian, client, interest group, and entrepreneurial. Majoritarian politics results when a proposed policy offers widespread benefits and widespread costs, and an appeal to a popular majority is necessary for the policy to be adopted. Majoritarian politics evokes less conflict than the other types, because there is less incentive for organized interests to get involved. Client politics occurs when the
244 LEADERSHIP FOR THE COMMON GOOD
perceived benefits of a policy are highly concentrated on a particular group but perceived costs are distributed widely. This type of politics can become highly conflictual once the benefits are publicized and stakeholders who are expected to bear the cost become outraged. “Pork-barrel” policies are the classic example leading to client politics. An interest group policy provides benefits for one relatively small group and exacts costs from another group. Obviously, the politics surrounding these issues can be extremely conflictual. Finally, an entrepreneurial policy is one that provides perceived benefits for many stakeholders or for society as a whole, while imposing costs on a smaller number of identifiable stakeholder groups. Policy entrepreneurs should be aware of this typology; their role is especially crucial in adopting entrepreneurial policies because of the need to persuade policy makers that the policy actually will benefit a large number of stakeholders and that the concentrated costs are merited.
Robert Waste (1997) points out, however, that classifying public issues isn’t always this easy, since issues tend to move around among classifications. For example, movement among categories may occur as someone radically redefines an issue or escalates the conflict associated with it, or as an event alters how people perceive the event or their stake in it. Issues may also be surrounded by conflictual politics because they are connected to other highly conflictual issues.
Policy entrepreneurs should seek to frame issues so they produce majoritarian politics if possible; thus they should strive to emphasize the benefits of the solution to society as a whole. The AIDS case is an example, because health professionals emphasized that resources were needed to understand, treat, and prevent the disease, not just to help gay men and drug users but to protect the health of the entire population. This case was easier to make once more and more groups were affected. Policy entrepreneurs also need, if possible, to keep issues from being linked to other issues that are surrounded by high antagonism among groups of warring stakeholders.
Development of Conceptual Frameworks
In the search-for-solutions phase, policy entrepreneurs explore how a public problem and promising solutions might be linked together in a way that indicates how stakeholders might move toward a better future. These leaders use the interpretive schemes they em-
SEARCHING FOR SOLUTIONS IN FORUMS 245
phasized in the problem statement to frame their argument and evoke a favorable emotional response to potential solutions. They support their argument with persuasive evidence and testimonials— often personal stories—from credible, sometimes well-known individuals. They should be open to reworking and reframing their problem definition as the search for solutions turns up new information. For example, many members of the steering committee for the African American Men Project initially framed the problems affecting a large number of African American men in Hennepin County as a case of “social injustice.” As they began considering the goals of a diverse array of key stakeholders, they realized that many of these stakeholders were unlikely to support solutions aimed solely or mainly at remedying injustice. As Gary Cunningham has noted, “We realized we were asking the wrong question.” The question was not how to help African American men who were struggling against economic odds and institutionalized racism, but how to help African American men help themselves, and how to convince other stakeholders to do things that were in their self-interest and the interest of African American men.
Policy entrepreneurs develop a conceptual framework for the story that the advocacy coalition tells about the significance of the problem, its causes, and the pathway to change. In the AAMP case, the conceptual framework was “What’s good for African American men is good for Hennepin County.” The framework is helpful because it does not tie the advocacy coalition to a single solution; rather, it allows the members to embrace multiple solutions for a family of problems. A social-justice framework would have been divisive, because it all too easily evokes blame: classically, the majority population is blamed for being the oppressors and they in turn blame African American men for not succeeding. Linking benefits for African American men on the one hand and Hennepin County on the other hand sets up a different emotional dynamic. By asking, in effect, all groups in the county how they can help each other, this frame opens the way to more creative problem solving.
Identification of Solution Components
Policy entrepreneurs help supporters cast their net broadly to capture not only solutions already familiar to them but also solutions that have been tried elsewhere. Additionally, they seek innovative
246 LEADERSHIP FOR THE COMMON GOOD
solutions, quite different from what has been tried before (Nutt, 2002), although innovation of this sort is typically a recombination of existing solutions (Kingdon, 1995). Every truly useful solution has to be tailored to particular circumstances (Nadler and Hibino, 1998). In practice, policy entrepreneurs help constituents find a set of solutions that include adaptation of familiar solutions, those implemented elsewhere, and innovation. A specific solution may be linked to a part of the overall problem and should be flexible enough to allow translation into a sellable proposal in the next phase. Kathleen Allen and Cynthia Cherrey (2000) recommend families of solutions that can foster systemic change.
Policy entrepreneurs should pay attention to the design of market, government, nonprofit, and community institutions that can implement and stabilize the desired changes (Brandl, 1998; Salamon, 1995; Kurland and Zeder, 2001; Weimer and Vining, 1999). They may need to develop agreement on the best use and combination of the three institutional types. For example, if the desired changes include public goods—services or products that no one can be excluded from consuming—government organizations should be involved in establishing mandates, incentives, resources, and accountability for producing those goods. This does not mean that a government agency itself has to provide the services or products. For example, governments around the world are increasingly contracting with businesses and nonprofit organizations to supply public services (Kettl, 2000). Overreliance on government control and provision of services can produce harmful effects (Scott, 1998). Overreliance on business solutions to public problems may allow profit seeking to trump the well-being of a community (Weimer and Vining, 1999). Because nonprofit organizations are so diverse (in terms of infrastructure, aims, and methods), public policy makers and managers might have trouble knowing how best to work with them and whether they are capable of delivering desired services or products (Salamon, 1995). Communities also can fail in serving public aims (Brandl, 1998).
Policy entrepreneurs may have to work hard in this phase to keep constituents from latching on to the first promising solution they encounter, a practice that Herbert Simon has called “satisficing” (Simon, 1957), or what is more commonly known as “jumping to solutions.” To develop an effective family of solutions, policy en-
SEARCHING FOR SOLUTIONS IN FORUMS 247
trepreneurs must sustain commitment to an expansive search strategy. Such a strategy brings benefits for the participants as they talk to people they would not ordinarily encounter, in places they would not ordinarily search. They expand their ability to communicate across boundaries, collect and synthesize information, and make considered judgments.
Efficient Use of Resources
A well-executed search makes sense even when resources are scarce, since it should ultimately save time and money through tapping existing knowledge, models, and expertise. Such a search may not be particularly cheap or quick, but it will find desirable solutions as efficiently as possible. It prevents the tendency of groups and organizations to engage in a simplistic, short, and shallow search for solutions to a problem in order to save time and money. A simplistic solution adopted in haste may be costly not just because it does a poor job of solving the problem but because it spawns unanticipated problems (Nutt, 2002). The presumed efficiency of a cheap and quick search is therefore likely to be ephemeral. For example, the Bush administration had a “solution” to Al Qaeda-backed terrorism after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, which was to invade Afghanistan a month later (where there was a real connection to this terrorism) and to invade Iraq in March 2003 (where there was little or no connection). Unfortunately, although the United States and its allies carefully planned the invasion of Iraq, they did not carefully plan what they would do after they won. In fact, they hardly planned at all for what would happen after victory, which meant the coalition moved “blind into Baghdad” (Fallows, 2004) and “botched the occupation” (Rieff, 2003). The real tragedy is that virtually all of the difficulties the coalition faced were easily known but ignored by the administration when it misdiagnosed the problem and blinded itself to important learning with a simplistic solution-search strategy.
Enhancement of Quality, Legitimacy, and Prestige
High-quality solutions are those that attack the causes of a problem, that have minimal adverse effects, and that produce widespread benefits at reasonable cost. Legitimate solutions pass legal
248 LEADERSHIP FOR THE COMMON GOOD
and ethical tests. Solutions gain prestige through attachment to respected people, institutions, or processes. Policy entrepreneurs help constituents develop criteria for evaluating the quality, legitimacy, and prestige of proposed solutions. They organize forums in which stakeholders representing diverse interests can discuss and evaluate the solutions (Innes, 1996; Roberts, 1997; Margarum, 2002; Burby, 2003).
Placement of Issue on the Public Agenda
Policy entrepreneurs strive to reach an array of stakeholders through face-to-face forums as well as mass and special-interest media to convey the message that solutions exist or can be enacted to deal with an urgent and significant public problem. They hope to foster a sense among citizens that policy makers should at least consider those solutions. They may use polling data to demonstrate to policy makers that public demand for action is rising.
Expanded Advocacy Coalition
Forums convened to consider solutions in this phase (and associated media coverage) may attract new groups of stakeholders to become involved in the change effort. They may be drawn by the specific solutions being considered or by the overall sense that solutions exist to an urgent problem. Wise policy entrepreneurs find a way to help new members of the coalition become full partners in the coalition’s work and ensure that old members stay on board. For example, the World Business Council on Sustainable Development launched a Young Managers Team to involve a younger generation of businesspeople in the effort to find solutions to environmental degradation. The first thirty-member team attended the 2002 Earth Summit, where they participated in a local service project and organized a dialogue with other young businesspeople, as well as representatives of government and nonprofit organizations. The WBCSD has published a report and produced a video about the team’s experiences. Jan Hively ensures that new partners in the vital aging campaign receive information she collects at conferences and other sources, so they are up to date on related research and programs.