The Science of Muddling Through

PPD 500 - B (FA12) Intersectoral Leadership,

The Science of Muddling Through,

In a policy problem many do not know what policy or action will eventually be implemented, policy evaluation has to continuously examine the content of different policy components, while understanding the policies objectives and goals. This also allows us to understand and explain public policy, like different stakeholders perceptions of a policy problem, and the need to be analyzed and dealt with in a timely manner. We also have learned from the readings this week that “Muddling through” can be somewhat a policy evaluation that should also facilitate the interpretation of the policy, but in a broader context. What values and the order of how the policy or program promotes the outcome is very important. When a open evaluation framework is used, and a mix of criteria does facilitate a broader interpretation of the policy process, it is then that we can begin to see how a leader can work through all of the problems that arise during a policy problem.

In the “Muddling Through” article, Lindblom talked about the way, many see this in a traditional way of thinking about policy. Many administrators quickly set up a goal and then we begin to work toward the goal right away, which works theoretically, but we also find that many of our political agencies do not work this same way. Instead, we see policy changes in very small increments, and over a large period, could it be because Congress is made up of 100 Senators and 435 House of Representatives who all have a vote, and we all know that that they do not agree on much, and they all have local interest to please. Therefore, if we want all of these people to come together to agree on just one goal, the government would never get anything accomplished.

Lindblom also argues that our people in Washington do agree on the means through which each committee member fulfills their individual goals, yet they could not agree as one group. This type of agreeing method is called the Rational Comprehensive method, or Root method. Why root, because you begin at the root of the problem and build something upon this. Yet the branch method is a formalized method of successive limited comparisons. This method is also called the Branch method, which its theory comes from starting in the branches, and not going back to the roots. An administrator sometimes can work from the existing system and just shakes the branches a little to come up with a solution or new policy. These theories have many merits and demerits to a solution of a policy problem.

First Lindblom asserts that the root methods first step is to agree on goals, and then it moves forward by designing the means to meet these goals. The branch method looks at it a little different from the root method. The branch method starts by identifying