by Stephen Kendal

Created on: June 05, 2010

  Introduction

An ideal policy is of little use if it is not well implemented. Implementation is understood, therefore in this article as the means to fulfil or satisfy the conditions of a policy. Implementation is therefore increasingly under scrutiny because of its role in determining outcomes in practice.  This therefore also means the role of leadership is crucial for implementation of policy ideas because without sufficient leadership skills implementation may be badly flawed or unsuccessful. Study of implementation is therefore important and some of the reasons for this are summarised excellently in the “Policy Advice Initiative’ of the State Services Commission of New Zealand of 1992:

The greatest risk is the belief that implementation issues are not worth worrying about. Implementation issues tend to arise at the end of the analytical process, often disturbing agreements reached on more basic issues. To minimise the risks of a proposal working in theory but not in practice, policy analysis should incorporate implementation considerations from the earliest stages of a project (State Services Commission, 1992).

Study of implementation is vital to an appropriate understanding of the process of implementation (national, state and territory levels) and overseas. This includes the private as well as the public sector. Ministers, senior executives and the general public are curious to know about the process and how to improve it. There is a need to know, and research results can be expected to be widely appreciated when undertaken, but due to the complexity involved analysis can only be made when possible on a selective basis in the various contexts, which is undertaken in Australia or elsewhere.

Many theoretical models of implementation (especially of the role of top-down and bottom-up processes and models which account for the stress of conflict and bargaining) have been devised to best account for the dynamics of the implementation process. Consequently this has led to discussion and analysis of the linkage that could be relevant between the determination of policy and making its realisation a practical outcome. One analytical model developed in this tradition and successfully accounts for top-down and bottom-up processes avoids the disadvantages of too much theorising and lends itself directly to the testing and evaluation of outcomes is that of Cerych and Sabatier (1986) but even this model which identifies more clearly than others

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next Page >>