Why is policy implementation difficult?

Suicide – Is CBT the answer? An Introduction

A Reflection on Leadership Style in Modern Organisations

The implementation stage of the policy process is by definition an operational phase where policy is actually translated into action with the hope of solving some public problem. Theodoulou and Kofinis identify three key challenges which they believe can routinely impede the effective implementation of public policy. Those three challenges are:

Challenges to Policy Implementation

• Clarity of policy goals
• Information intelligence
• Strategic planning

(Theodoulou and Kofinis, 2004)

Clarity of Policy Goals:

ìClear policy or program goals help specify the ends or objectives desired from the policy action. Ideally, policies should be formulated with consideration of what the actual specific goals of the policy areÖA goal stated with clarity and specificity not only provides direction but also improves the basis by which policies can be evaluated, for accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness (2004, p. 183).î

Information Intelligence:

ìInformation intelligence refers to the strategic necessity for constant feedback as to how implementation is progressing, as well asÖpreliminary assessments of impactsÖGiven the increasing reliance on multiple bureaucracies, information and feedback is essential to gauge the degree of interagency and intergovernmental cooperation and conflict, which may be affecting implementationÖInformation intelligence requires a high level of communication and feedback not only from the agencies involvedÖbut alsoÖfrom the population affected by the policy action. Implementation can be improved only if the implementers have insight as to how a policy or program is affecting a target population (2004, p. 184).î

Strategic Planning:

ìThe purpose of strategic planning, within the context of policy implementation, is to highlight the importance of assessing the capacity of an agency to meet specific implementation tasks and goals mandated by the policy decision. Essentially, strategic planning is a tool with which the agency can evaluate its ability to achieve the goals of the policy, as well as plan for how the policy will be executed (2004, pp. 184-185).î

Steps to Strategic Planning

• Statement of agency goals, mission, or vision
• Adoption of a time frame
• Assessment of present capabilities
• Assessment of organizational environment
• Development of a strategic plan
• Organizational integration

(Theodoulou and Kofinis, 2004)

It is important to note that these three key implementation challenges as briefly outlined above do not represent the universe of potential problems that can be encountered during the implementation stage. Peters identifies many other pathologies and variables which can equally impede successful policy implementation. Some of the policy distracters discussed by Peters are similar to those identified by Theodoulou and Kofinis and they include: the vagaries of the legislation, the number and diversity of competing interest groups involved in the policy process, organizational disunity of the institutional actors, standard operating procedures employed by administrative agencies, poor organizational communication both internal and external, the perceived inability of administrative agencies to learn from prior experiences in a reasonably quick period of time, inter-organizational politics and conflict, and the difficulties experienced with vertical and horizontal implementation structures (Peters, 2007). The importance of the knowledge of these challenges is that it helps us to understand that policy implementation is not easy to begin with, and it can be made much more difficult if no attention or consideration is given to these potential pitfalls and the subsequent obstacles that they can engender if they are ignored.

© The Pennsylvania State University

• 
  Access through your institution

Volume 24, Issue 9, September 1996, Pages 1403-1415

https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(96)00050-2Get rights and content

View full text

For policy changes to be effective, the implementation process needs to be considered as important as the policy decision-making. Implementing policy change is a complex and difficult process. The policy implementation process is not linear nor does it take place in a closed system. It is politicised and fragmented, involving changes in the structure and rules of institutions. Organisational changes are necessary to implement policy reforms. These changes are difficult to ascertain and lead to resistance. The unpredictable nature of policy implementation means it is necessary to have a monitoring system in place.

This article analyses the nature and organisation of policy implementation. It uses case studies from the Implementing Policy Change Project that assisted in several innovative responses to the organisational challenges of policy implementation in Bolivia, Philippines, Guinea-Bissau and Uganda. The formation of new organisations is seen as an innovative response to the implementation of policy change and an effective bridging mechanism in the process.

The person in charge of the implementation task is rarely obvious, especially when the policy affects multiple agencies. A stakeholder analysis will help to identify the agencies affected by a policy change. Broad policy change will require collaboration between several institutions. The key considerations to implement policy change are:

• New arenas of decision-making can create the necessary legitimacy to move the policy forward. In Bolivia, a macro-economic group composed of the Minister of Planning, Minister of Finance and the Central Bank President was formed to oversee and monitor the implementation of critical short-term reforms.
• Policies require adequate support or will fail. The Uganda National Forum serves to rally the support of the private sector behind economic reform by creating a formal dialogue between the private sector and the Government.
• Agencies will have to be redesigned to meet the needs of policy implementation. In Guinea- Bissau the judicial sector underwent major changes with the implementation of a market-oriented framework, which needs a functional legal system. A Judicial Working Group was set up to manage the transition to an independent judicial sector. The Working Group led a collaborative strategic process to structure a new incentive system and capacity-building programs.
• Duty Drawback Centre (DDC) in the Philippines is a new agency devised to improve the efficiency of the process for granting and delivering tax rebates to exporters. Several departments had to defer functions to this centre for policy to work. As a result, many agencies resisted the DDC, as they lost many of their functions. Organisational development and team-building workshops organised by IPC helped to reduce resistance.

Traditional policy implementation organisations are frequently inappropriate or incapable of responding adequately to tasks required for implementation. Bridging mechanisms created by temporary task forces and implementation units have emerged as a way for agencies to learn new functions and adapt to new mandates and structures.

• Financial resources must be set aside to implement a new policy. The use of loose co-ordination networks can serve to create efficiencies in mobilising scarce resources, e.g. West African Enterprise Network.
• It is important that organisations affected by policy change do not adopt regulations or practices that might impede the policy change process. Agencies should be aware of what others are doing. Co-ordination is necessary.
• Co-ordinating bodies or networks, which meet to exchange information, can be useful to avoid ‘stepping on one another’s toes’ in the implementation process and to dispel any potential threats posed, e.g. Policy Analysis and Co-ordination Unit in Zambia.
• Monitoring implementation is essential. Implementation units can cut across functional boundaries and be effective if they have the capacity to deliver high-quality analysis and experience a low degree of hostility from other agencies.
• Task forces are developed as new arenas of decision-making on policy reform to legitimise and operationalise decisions for implementing policy. (Instead of using traditional policy-making mechanisms which may be slow and inappropriate.)
• New organisations formed not only show new approaches for implementation, but also provide a breathing space for permanent institutions to respond to policy change demands.