Crosby B.C., Bryson J.M. - Leadership for the Common Good (2005)(en)

REASSESSING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS 349

Build a New System

Consider building a new system without dismantling the old system. Although the result is parallel, redundant, or competing systems, net social gains may result through better market segmentation and the benefits of competition (Bendor, 1985; Osborne and Plastrik, 1997).

Policy Termination

Think of policy termination as an extreme version of policy reform. Many of the guidelines outlined under policy modification are applicable to policy termination as well (Holzer, Lee, and Newman, 2003; Nutt, 2001). Pay particular attention to the design and use of forums, arenas, and courts. You are likely to need to organize a new coalition around alternative ideas, interests, and agreements.

A substantial literature has developed on how to manage cutbacks in general. Behn (1983) argues that there are typically two stages to cutback efforts in a public organization. In the first stage, the organization borrows against the future to cover the gap between current revenues and needed expenditures. If revenues are not increased in the future, this tactic merely makes the adjustment to retrenchment or outright termination worse by postponing the second stage, or “day of reckoning,” when major cuts and redesigns are made. The steps listed here would appear to be important cutback management tasks; though useful, they are obviously no panacea or quick fix (Behn, 1983; Holzer, Lee, and Newman, 2003):

•Explain the reality.

•Take a long-term view.

•Develop the support of key leaders, decision makers, and constituencies, including legislators if necessary, in the public sector.

•Emphasize mission, vision, and values.

•Develop clear guidelines and goals for making reductions.

•Emphasize the importance of focusing on results, accountability, and integrity.

•Use strategic assessment and performance measures to know what to cut and what to reward.

350 LEADERSHIP FOR THE COMMON GOOD

•Rely on transparent communications to help build understanding of the problems to be faced, and to build cooperation among affected units, unions, employees, and other stakeholders.

•Maintain morale, in part by indicating what is off-limits to being cut.

•Attract and keep quality people, which may be particularly difficult when people think the ship is sinking.

•Reinvest and redeploy staff on the basis of a strategic vision; create opportunity for innovation; emphasize continuous improvement in what remains.

•Create incentives for cooperation.

•Avoid mistakes.

•Be compassionate.

•Celebrate the actual accomplishments of the people working in the organization or with the policy or program being eliminated.

If you have necessary executive or administrative authority on your side, it may be possible to terminate a policy fairly expeditiously, using a truncated version of the policy change cycle. Research by Robert Behn and Mark Daniels indicates that in this case it is wise to put an outsider or a lame duck in charge of termination (Behn, 1978; Daniels, 1996), since these people are likely to be more willing to take a position that is unpopular with powerful constituencies of the existing policy.

Stop Resistance Quickly

Move quickly to short circuit resistance from implementers and beneficiaries of the existing policy.

Separate Stakeholders from Policies

Estrange important stakeholders from the policy (Mangham, 1986). Focus attention on the harm it does, and if possible link your effort to remedy this harm to ascendant ideologies or interpretive schemes. Thus, as vital aging advocates highlight the harm of channeling public funding mainly to nursing home and hospital care of older adults, they align their messages with the deinstitu-

REASSESSING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS 351

tionalization ideology that has become dominant in the U.S. social policy debate in recent years. Particularly in policy termination, you should be careful to praise the accomplishments and good intentions of those who really have performed well in the existing regime.

Favor Adopting the New Over Terminating the Old

Advocate adoption of a new policy rather than termination of the old. This approach focuses on the benefits of the new policy for an array of stakeholders. You may need to include sweeteners in the new policy to quell resistance from beneficiaries of the old one. Behn (1978) also advises terminating only those portions of a policy that should end, and being willing to accept additional costs in the short run to obtain long-term savings or improvement.

Starting Anew

Assuming you are ready to move on to a new public problem affecting your organization or community, we recommend these initial strategies:

•Focus on the context and people involved.

•Outline compelling reasons to undertake the policy change effort.

•Assess leadership capabilities, and begin organizing effective teams.

•Begin laying the groundwork for a winning coalition.

•Think ahead about the process of issue creation.

•Develop a general strategy.

•Think about the costs and consequences of the policy change effort.

•Develop an action plan for obtaining an initial agreement to address the problem.

•When the going gets tough, keep in mind the benefits of the proposed policy change.

•Be willing to concede that the time may not be right for the preferred policy change.

REASSESSING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS 353

change effort are important, but you also have to identify powerful individuals and groups who can be sponsors and champions of the change effort.

Think Ahead About the Process of Issue Creation

This is more visionary leadership work. Recall that issue creation is the process by which a public problem and at least one solution that has pros and cons from the stakeholders’ standpoint gain a place on the public agenda. We suggest that you engage an initial small group of supporters in a truncated version of the process we have described in previous chapters. Doing so helps you think ahead about what might occur once more stakeholders get involved, and to decide whether the policy change effort you are considering is likely to be worthwhile. Naturally the change effort is likely to change along the way, no matter what, but at least advance thinking can reduce unwelcome surprises.

Here is an outline for a truncated issue creation process:

•Explore various problem definitions, or formulations, to determine whether an apparent public problem really should be solved. You might have to gather data, examine the actions and results of systems already in place, and talk with many knowledgeable people.

•Consider the range of possible solutions to the problem. Which elements of various proposals already circulating in various communities might be promising?

•Specify the constellation of stakeholders that might be affected by the problem and by the change effort. Use Exercise 4.3 to assess whether you can develop problem frames that will attract the support of enough stakeholders to join a supportive advocacy coalition. The exercise should also give you an idea of how strong the opposition to proposed changes is going to be.

•Determine if an issue can be framed so that it can get on the public agenda and, at the same time, be worth the effort required to persuade relevant decision makers to adopt and implement a proposed change.

354 LEADERSHIP FOR THE COMMON GOOD

Develop a General Strategy

Use the oval-mapping process described in Resource B to elicit and connect ideas for how to proceed, and make a list of the forums, arenas, and courts in which the problem and potential solutions are currently being addressed. Refer to the map and list as you and your colleagues answer these questions:

•How is the problem being discussed (or not discussed) in existing forums? Who are the main participants, and what would they think about other ways of defining the problem and potential solutions?

•What decisions about the problem and potential solutions are being made now in existing arenas? How do these decisions alleviate or aggravate the public problem? Who are the key makers or influencers of decisions in these arenas? What would they think about new definitions of the problem and the solutions implied by those definitions?

•How is residual conflict that is related to the problem being resolved in the existing courts? What underlying norms do those courts enforce? Who are the key participants in these courts? What would they think about various problem definitions and potential solutions?

•How would existing forums, arenas, and courts have to be changed to get the problem and at least one promising solution on the public agenda? Are new forums, arenas, and courts necessary? How could advocates persuade policy makers to place a formal proposal to adopt a solution or solutions on their agenda and adopt and implement the proposal? Which new decision makers or advocates should be involved?

•In light of these analyses, what are the general outlines of a strategy for policy change?

Issue creation relies on the effective design and use of forums more than anything else, so be especially thoughtful and creative in strategizing about forums. Even when you’re not sure what to do, an informal forum can be helpful. As Hubert Humphrey sagely advised, “When in doubt, talk.”

REASSESSING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS 355

Think About the Costs and

Consequences of the Policy Change Effort

Develop answers to these questions:

•What are the consequences of doing nothing?

•What are the benefits and costs for particular stakeholders?

•What are the personal, team, and organizational costs (time, energy, money, attention, and alternative expenditures forgone) of the policy change effort?

•In light of predicted costs and benefits, is the change effort likely to be worthwhile?

Additionally, think about the worst-case scenario. Consider the risks of losing or ending up with a situation that is worse than the starting point. Think about how you can avoid unwanted outcomes. Set limits; decide what you are unwilling to do, even if those things appear necessary to achieve policy change. What are the personal, fi- nancial, political, ethical, legal, or other limits on what you are willing to do?

Develop an Action Plan for Obtaining an Initial Agreement

The action plan should aim at reaching the kind of initial agreement described in Chapter Six. The plan should embody a strategy for introducing the idea of policy change, developing an understanding of the change process, developing a commitment to the change effort, and reaching an actual agreement.

Keep in Mind the Benefits of the Proposed Policy Changes

When the going gets tough, recall the vision that motivates and inspires you and your colleagues. As Rosabeth Moss Kanter indicates, every innovation feels like a failure in the middle (Kanter, 1989). Reinforce and hang on to your optimism; view adversity as temporary, specific to the situation, and either someone else’s fault or the result of something beyond your control (Seligman, 1998). Optimists are the dreamers whose vision and energy can inspire and

356 LEADERSHIP FOR THE COMMON GOOD

mobilize others to undertake collective action in pursuit of the common good. Good leaders are flexibly optimistic; they envision the inspiring and even radical possibilities for change, but they also realistically assess barriers to change and action to overcome them. Flexible optimists learn to dream, in other words, with their feet on the ground.

Realize the Time May Not Be Right

A problem or need may simply not be urgent enough to command a constituency for change. A workable solution may not be available. Other existing or potential change efforts may offer unbeatable competition for citizens’ and policy makers’ attention. For whatever reason, be willing to concede that your cause may be lost, at least for the time being. At the same time, you can take heart from those who have championed policy changes that at one time were hopeless but eventually succeeded in great measure. We have in mind such supposedly lost causes as reduction in nuclear weapons, women’s suffrage, abolition of slavery, control of landmines, environmental protection, and the fight against AIDS. The history of these change efforts emphasizes the importance of the long view and a commitment for the long haul. No virtuous cause is lost forever, so long as some people keep its flame alive.

Summary

Once a new policy regime is fully established, policy entrepreneurs should be prepared for a final phase of the policy change cycle, in which they prompt consideration of whether new policies, programs, projects, and practices warrant continuation, substantial modification, or termination. To do this, they can take advantage of regular review opportunities such as a reauthorization session or budget cycle, and create new ones through, for example, a conference, study commission, or public hearing. In this phase, they should seek to resolve residual implementation problems and keep the institutions responsive to real public needs, problems, and opportunities. As in earlier phases, they must continue paying attention to maintaining the support of a dynamic advocacy coalition and to designing appropriate forums, arenas, and courts. They also

REASSESSING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS 357

should gather needed resources for reform of the new regime or for tackling other complex public problems.

As policy entrepreneurs prepare to move onto new problems, needs, and opportunities, they should focus again on the policy change cycle as a whole and sketch out what it will take to assemble a needed advocacy coalition, create a public issue in forums, and obtain the needed decisions from arenas or courts. If the time is right, they can begin the journey of leadership for the common good all over again.