TRADITIONS IN PLANNING

TRADITIONS IN PLANNING
4 major intellectual traditions in planning as identified by
scholars Friedmann and Hudson (1974)
Philosophical synthesis
Rationalism
Organizational Development
Empiricism
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 goals
determining objectives
making plans
Implementation
review.
3. ORGANIZATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
Focuses primarily on ways to achieve organizational
change
Important factors include:
Human relations approach to innovation
Attention to change in management style
Employee satisfaction
Decision-making process
General 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. Synoptic
b. Resource allocation
c. Manpower
d. Rate of return
e. Satisficing
Focus:
a. Political systems
b. Incremental
c. Organizational development
d. Advocacy development
e. Transactive
f. Learning-adaptive
g. Mixed scanning
PLANNING MODELS:
SITAR Models
(Hudson 1979)
WILSONS
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, and
implementation 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
WILSONS 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.
WILSONS 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 systemas 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)
WILSONS 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.
MAJ OR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE
NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES
APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED
SCANNING
GENERAL
SYSTEMS
LEARNING
ADAPTIVE
Key concepts Scientific
empiricism
Structured
rationality
Systematic
problem
solving
Efficiency
optimizatn
Muddling
through
Disjointed
increment
Partisan
mutual
adjustment
Process
rationality
Self-guiding
society
Active
social self
Public-
responsive
Authentic
Societal
knowledge
Interdepdnt
holistic,
purposive,
open
systems
Societal self
control
Natural
hierarchies
System
design and
redesign
New
Humanism
Pyschsocial
developmt
Flexible-
adaptive
Future
responsive
Societal
learning
MAJ OR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE
NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES
APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED
SCANNING
GENERAL
SYSTEMS
LEARNING
ADAPTIVE
Locusof
power
Political
scientists
and
political
leaders
Fragmentd
among
multiple
political
leaders and
potent
interest grps
Balanced
between
active
public
groups and
high level
guidance
units
System-
wide
communal,
but vertical
centered
and
integrative
Loose
network
Communal
and
participativ
Small talk
groups
MAJ OR 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
agent
Dynamic
system
designer,
manager
Interpersonl
lead agent
Stimulator
and
designer
MAJ OR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE
NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES
APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED
SCANNING
GENERAL
SYSTEMS
LEARNING
ADAPTIVE
Major
methods
Systems
analysis
Cost-
benefit
analysis
Information
technology
Decision
theory
Fragmentd
analysis by
advocacies
but
competitiv,
interactive
bargaining
Process is
key
Concensus
building
Societal
knowledge
generation
New
information,
feedback
technology
Holistic
model
building
System
simulation
Creative
system
design
Social
learning
Cybernetic
technology
Self-
transformng
institutions
Interpersonl
action
Innovation
and
adaptation
Widesprd
social
learning
MAJ OR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE
NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES
APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED
SCANNING
GENERAL
SYSTEMS
LEARNING
ADAPTIVE
Implementatn Programng
Budgeting
Managemt
evaluation
Decentralz,
remedial,
further
adaptation
as needed
Incrementl
with steady
feedback
in context
of
continuing
broad
scanning
Disorderly,
creative
Decentralz
Serial
choice and
learning
but
systemic
perspective
Temporary,
participativ
e
Continuing
feedback
and
creative
adaptation
MAJ OR CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE
NATIONAL PLANNING APPROACHES
APPROACH RATIONAL INCREMENTAL MIXED
SCANNING
GENERAL
SYSTEMS
LEARNING
ADAPTIVE
Epistemology Positivism Positivism Critical of
positivism,
but
otherwise
ambiguous
Systems Phenome-
nology
Adapted from The National Planning Idea in the US by Wilson, 1980; Boulder, CO: Westview Press