Field observation of practicing policy analysts, and review of a growing revisionist literature that examines policy analysis as currently practiced and utilized, produces three themes that diverge from traditional conceptualizations of rational decision-making. These themes suggest that the utilization of policy analysis can best be understood and facilitated by (a) analyzing the organizational structures and procedures facilitating or impeding its use; (b) analyzing the attitudes and motivations of the producers and users of policy analysis; or (c) analyzing the interrelationship of policy analysis with diverse competing inputs to decision-making. By rethinking the meaning of "decisions, " and adopting innovative concepts from March and Olsen's (1979) "garbage can model" of decision processes, a framework for integrating these revisionist themes is proposed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BENVENISTE, G. (1977) The Politics of Expertise. San Francisco: Boyd Fraser. (Originally published in 1972.)
2.
BROWN, B. M. (1978) "Second generation West Coast."Amer. Rehabilitation (July/August): 23-30.
3.
BROWN, P. L. (1978) "Establishing a program structure," in F. J. Lyden and E. G. Miller (eds.) Public Budgeting: Program Planning and Evaluation. Chicago: Rand McNally.
4.
CAMPBELL, D. J. (1975) "Assessing the impact of planned social change," in G. M. Lyons (ed.) Social Research and Policy Studies. Hanover, NH: Univ: Press of New England.
5.
CAPLAN, N. (1977) "A minimal set of conditions necessary for the utilization of social science knowledge in policy formulation at the national level," pp. 183-197 in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Research in Public Policy Making. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
6.
CAPLAN, N.A. MORRISON , and J. STAMBAUGH (1975) The Use of Social Science Knowledge in Policy Decisions at the National Level. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
7.
CHELIMSKY, E. (1980) "Evaluation research credibility and the congress."Policy Studies J.8, 7: 1177-1184.
8.
COHEN, D. A. and J. WEISS (1977) "Social science and social policy: schools and race," pp. 67-83 in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy Making. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
9.
COWHIG, J. D. (1971) "Federal grant-supported research and `relevance': some reservations."Amer. Sociologist6: 65-69.
10.
DROR, Y. (1968) Public Policy Making Re-Examined. San Francisco: Chandler.
11.
DUNSIRE, A. (1978) Implementation in a Bureaucracy. New York: St. Martin's. Administration Rev.27, 5: 385-392.
12.
ETZIONI, A. (1967) "Mixed-scanning: a third approach to decision making."Public Administration Rev.27, 5: 385-392.
13.
FLODEN, R. E. and S. S. WEIMER (1978) "Rationality to ritual: the multiple roles of evaluation in governmental processes."Policy Sciences9: 15-24.
14.
GLASER, E. M. and S. TAYLOR (1969) Factors influencing the Success of Applied Research. Washington, DC: National Institute of Mental Health, Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
15.
GUBA, E. and Y. LINCOLN (1982) Naturalistic Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
HARTLE, T. W. and M. J. HALPERN (1980) "Rational and incremental decision making: an exposition and critique with illustrations," pp. 125-144 in M.J. Whiteet al. (eds.) Managing Public Systems: Analytic Techniques for Public Administration. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
17.
HEDRICK, T. E. (1980) "Interactions among evaluation, program implementation, and policy in a decentralized system."Policy Studies J.8, 7: 1203-1212.
18.
KEY, V. O., Jr. (1940) "The lack of a budgetary theory."Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.34: 1137-1144.
19.
KRESS, G. , G. KOEHLER, and J. F. SPRINGER (1980) "Policy drift: an evaluation of the Caliornia business enterprise program."Policy Studies J.8, 7: 1101-1108.
20.
KRESS, G. , G. KOEHLER, and J. F. SPRINGER (1982) "Consulting environments in the public sector: implications for research utilization." Presented at the annual meeting of the Western Political Science Association, San Diego.
21.
LEVINE, J. P. , M. MUSHENO, and D. J. PALUMBO (1980) Criminal Justice: A Public Policy Approach, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
22.
LEWIS, V. B. (1952) "Toward a theory of budgeting. "Public Administration Rev.12: 42-54.
23.
LINDBLOM, C. E. (1959) "The science of muddling through. "Public Administration Rev.19: 79-99.
24.
MARCH, J. G. and J. P. OLSEN, with S. CHRISTENSEN, M. COHEN, H. ENDERUD, K. DREINER, P. ROMELAER, K. ROMMETVEIT, P. STAVA, and S. WEINER (1979) Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations. Bergen, Norway: Universitesforlaget.
25.
MARVER, J. D. (1980) Consultants Can Help. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
26.
MAYER, R. R. and E. GREENWOOD (1980) The Design of Policy Research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
27.
MELTSNER, A. (1976) Policy Analysts in the Bureaucracy. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
28.
MOCH, M. K. and L. R. PONDY (1979) "The structure of chaos: organized anarchy as a response to ambiguity."Administrative Sci. Q.24: 351-362.
29.
MOHR, L. (1976) "Organizations, decisions, and courts."Law & Society Rev.10: 621-642.
30.
MOWITZ, R. J. (1980) The Design of Public Decision Systems. Baltimore: University Park Press.
31.
NACHMIAS, D. (1980) "The role of evaluation in public policy."Policy Studies J.8, 7: 1163-1169.
32.
NELSON, R. R. (1977) The Moon and the Ghetto: An Essay on Public Policy Analysis. New York: Norton.
33.
ORLANS, H. (1973) Contracting for Knowledge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
PALUMBO, D. J. and P. WRIGHT (1981) "Standing the utilization question on its head: utilization of evaluation research and the decision making process." Presented at the meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Cincinnati.
35.
PALUMBO, D. J. and P. WRIGHT (1980) "Decision making and evaluation research."Policy Studies J.8, 7: 1170-1177.
36.
PATTON, M. Q. (1978) Utilization-Focused Evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
37.
PATTON, M. Q.et al. (1975) In Search of Impact: An Analysis of Utilization of Federal Health Evaluation Research. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota.
38.
PERROW, C. (1981) "Ambiguity and choice in organizations (review)."Contemporary Sociology14: 294-298.
39.
REIN, M. and S. S. WHITE (1977) "Policy research: belief and doubt."Policy Analysis4: 239-271.
40.
RIVLIN, A. M. (1972) Systematic Thinking for Social Action. New York: Brookings Institution.
41.
ROCHELEAU, B. and T. MacKESEY (1980) "Utilization-focused evaluation: a case study from the human services area."Policy Studies J.8, 7: 1212-1221.
42.
ROSE, R. (1977) "Implementation and evaporation: the record of MBO."Public Administration Rev.37, 1: 64-71.
43.
ROTHMAN, J. (1980) Using Research in Organizations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
44.
SABATIER, P. (1978) "The acquisition and utilization of technical information by administrative agencies."Admin. Sci. Q.23: 396-417.
45.
SCHON, D. (1971) Beyond the Stable State. New York: Norton.
46.
SPRINGER, J. F. (1983) "Burglary and robbery plea bargaining in California: an organizational perspective."Department of Political Science, University of Missouri-St. Louis. (mimeo)
47.
STODDARD, S. and B. BROWN (1978) "Evaluating California's independent living centers."Amer. Rehabilitation (November/December): 18-23.
48.
WEIK, K. E. (1969) The Social Psychology of Organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
49.
WEISS, C. H. (1980) "Knowledge creep and decision accretion."Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization1, 3: 381-404.
50.
WEISS, C. H. with M. J. BUCUVALAS (1980) Social Science Research and Decision Making. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
51.
WEISS, J. A. (1980) "Dilemmas of evaluating a balancing act: policies for prevention of child abuse."Policy Studies J.8, 7: 1222-1228.
52.
WHOLEY, J. S. (1983) Evaluation and Effective Public Management. Boston: Little, Brown.
53.
WILDAVSKY, A. (1979) The Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little, Brown.
