TRADITIONS IN PLANNING

TRADITIONS IN PLANNING

• 4 major intellectual traditions in planning as identified by scholars Friedmann and Hudson (1974)

Philosophical synthesisRationalismOrganizational DevelopmentEmpiricism

1. PHILOSOPHICAL SYNTHESIS

• Includes the work of scholars Etzione (1969) and Friedmann (1978, 1984)

• Attempted to construct an integrated view of planning as a social process.

• Emphasizes broad approaches that seeks insights into the social, economic, and ethical conditions, including environmental contexts of the institution or sector

2. RATIONALISM

• View people as a utility• Defines human relations in instrumental terms• It assumes a sequential, observable cycle that includes:

setting goalsdetermining objectivesmaking plansImplementationreview.

3. ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

• Focuses primarily on ways to achieve organizational change

• Important factors include:Human relations approach to innovationAttention to change in management styleEmployee satisfactionDecision-making processGeneral health of the organization

4. EMPRICISM

• Approach is from an empiricist perspective which recognizes the significance of behavior studies by public administrators, economists, and other social scientists concerned with the planning theory.

• Less normative than other traditions, less concerned with planned social change, and uses a positivistic framework for analysis.

PLANNING MODELS

GENERAL CATEGORIES OF PLANNING MODELS (AS CLASSIFIED BY ADAMS, 1991)

RATIONAL INTERACTIVE> Includes any models which view the planning process as basically sequential, observable, and capable of being evaluated.

> Reflects an emphasis on the human dynamics of decision making

Focus:a. Synopticb. Resource allocationc. Manpowerd. Rate of returne. Satisficing

Focus:a. Political systemsb. Incrementalc. Organizational developmentd. Advocacy developmente. Transactivef. Learning-adaptiveg. Mixed scanning

PLANNING MODELS:

SITAR Models (Hudson 1979)

WILSON’S PLANNING MODELS (Wilson, 1980)

SITAR MODELS (HUDSON 1979)

• Acronym for synoptic, incremental, transactive, advocacy,and radical.

• It is based on the Indian word sitar which refers to a stringed musical instrument that can be played by plucking one string at a time or by creating a blend of harmony (and dissonance) from all five elements.

• The first (synoptic) is rational and the rest are basically interactive.

1. SYNOPTIC

•This is identical to the rational model identified by many other planning theorists.

• Includes four classical elements: goal-setting, identification of alternatives, evaluation of means against ends, andimplementation of decisions.

2. INCREMENTAL

• Primarily identified with the writings of Lindblom,1959 (political scientist/economist) and Braybooke(political philosopher) and Lindblom (1970)

• Planning is constrained more by available means than by definition of ends, and that planned change at any level – institutional, sectoral, or national – typically represents small adjustments from the past.

3. TRANSACTIVE

•(Friedmann, 1973, and Warwick, 1977)•Emphasizes interaction or interpersonal dialogue and the process of mutual learning in planning

4. ADVOCACY

•An interactive model that emphasizes the confrontational characteristic of decision making.

•Advocacy is more goal and value-directed than transactive.

5. RADICAL

•Two versions:> Spontaneous activism – guided by

self-reliance and mutual aid (Hudson, 1979)

> Focus on situational characteristics of nations or systems that inhibit the equitable distribution of goods and services

WILSON’S PLANNING MODELS(WILSON, 1980)

• Introduces 3 alternative models aside from the rational and incremental models:1. Mixed scanning• Associated with sociologist Etzioni (1967)• Attempted to describe a planning model that was more realistic

than the rational model and less passive than the incremental model

• He believed that at times, a planner may need the completeness of context sought through rational, comprehensive planning, but that at other times such detail is unnecessary.

2. Learning-adaptive• Similar to transactive model in terms of treating planning as a process of social learning built on individual psychosocial development that is best realized in small, non-hierarchical groups.

WILSON’S PLANNING MODELS(WILSON, 1980)

3. General systems• Draws its theoretical support from a number of social

sciences and from emergent theory that attempts to use the idea of system as a unifying paradigm.

• Variations of the general system model are developed in great detail by Checkland (1978, 1981), Naughton (1979), Provost (1976), and Vickers (1981)

WILSON’S PLANNING MODELS(WILSON, 1980)

PROBLEM CATEGORIES OF ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

• To systems analysts, problems of organizations and systems may be roughly divided in two categories:

1. Problems which are amenable to hard system thinking (smaller set)• An engineering contribution to problem solving that has been helpful in introducing

systematic rationality into one important area of human decision making – selecting of efficient means from alternatives for achieving a desired end.

2. Problems that must be approached through soft systems thinking (larger set)• Offers a less precise and less quantifiable method for addressing ill-defined problems

like those found in most social systems E.g. An education system is a loosely coupled system and which addresses wicked problems in an effort to achieve multiple and often unclear goals should clearly be classified as a soft system.

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES

APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED SCANNING

GENERAL SYSTEMS

LEARNING ADAPTIVE

Key concepts ScientificempiricismStructured rationalitySystematic problem solvingEfficiency optimizatn

Muddling throughDisjointedincrementPartisan mutual adjustmentProcess rationality

Self-guidingsocietyActive social selfPublic-responsiveAuthenticSocietal knowledge

Interdepdntholistic, purposive, open systemsSocietal self controlNatural hierarchiesSystem design and redesign

New HumanismPyschsocialdevelopmtFlexible-adaptiveFuture responsiveSocietal learning

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES

APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED SCANNING

GENERAL SYSTEMS

LEARNING ADAPTIVE

Locus of power

Politicalscientists and political leaders

Fragmentdamong multiple political leaders and potent interest grps

Balanced between active public groups and high level guidanceunits

System-wide communal, but vertical centered and integrativeLoose network

Communal and participativSmall talk groups

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES

APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED SCANNING

GENERAL SYSTEMS

LEARNING ADAPTIVE

Role of planners

Professional scientific analysts

Mediators, power brokers, active participants

Active,integrative mediators among societal knowledge, decision making, and consensus-building units

Interactive change agentDynamic system designer, manager

Interpersonllead agentStimulator and designer

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES

APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED SCANNING

GENERAL SYSTEMS

LEARNING ADAPTIVE

Major methods

Systems analysisCost-benefit analysisInformation technologyDecision theory

Fragmentdanalysis by advocacies but competitiv, interactive bargainingProcess is key

ConcensusbuildingSocietalknowledge generationNew information, feedback technology

Holistic model buildingSystem simulationCreative system designSocial learningCybernetic technology

Self-transformnginstitutionsInterpersonlactionInnovation and adaptationWidesprdsocial learning

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES

APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED SCANNING

GENERAL SYSTEMS

LEARNING ADAPTIVE

Implementatn ProgramngBudgetingManagemtevaluation

Decentralz,remedial, further adaptation as needed

Incrementlwith steady feedback in context of continuing broad scanning

Disorderly, creativeDecentralzSerial choice and learning but systemic perspective

Temporary, participativeContinuing feedback and creative adaptation

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES

APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED SCANNING

GENERAL SYSTEMS

LEARNING ADAPTIVE

Epistemology Positivism Positivism Critical of positivism, butotherwise ambiguous

Systems Phenome-nology

Adapted from The National Planning Idea in the US by Wilson, 1980; Boulder, CO: Westview Press