The Policy Implementation Process

Author(s): Thomas B. Smith

Source: Policy Sciences , Jun., 1973, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Jun., 1973), pp. 197-209
Published by: Springer

Stable URL: [Link]

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@[Link].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
[Link]

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Policy Sciences

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
Policy Sciences 4 (1973), pp. 197-209
© Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam-Printed in Scotland

The Policy Implementation

Process
THOMAS B. SMITH

School of Political Science and Public Administration, Victoria University of Wellin

New Zealand

ABSTRACT

There is an implicit assumption in most policy studies that once a policy has been form
policy will be implemented. This assumption is invalid for policies formulated in many
World nations and for types of policies in Western societies. Third World governments
formulate broad, sweeping policies, and governmental bureaucracies often lack the capac
implementation. Interest groups, opposition parties, and affected individuals and groups
attempt to influence the implementation of policy rather than the formulation of policy.
A model of the policy implementation process is presented. Policy implementation is
tension generating force in society. Tensions are generated between and within four com
the implementing process: idealized policy, implementing organization, target group, an
environmental factors. The tensions result in transaction patterns which may or may no
the expectations of outcome of the policy formulators. The transacti6n patterns may be
crystallized into institutions. Both the transaction patterns and the institutions may gen
tensions which, by feedback to the policymakers and implementors, may support or reje
implementation of the policy.
By application of the model, policymakers can attempt to minimize disruptive tension
can result in the failure of policy outcomes to match policy expectations.

A general assumption is often made by scholars who analyze policies and bui
of the policy processes that once a policy has been made the policy will be imp
This assumption, in large part, accounts for the neglect of the policy implem
process in the models constructed to explain policymaking or to instruct po
in methods of better policy making.
In this paper the implications of this assumption will be evaluated-esp
terms of policy processes in Third World nations. I will also construct a mod
policy implementation process which may be useful in the analysis of policy
and in the formulation of policies.

Policymaking and Policy Implementation

There are a number of reasons for the neglect of the implementation of pol
current models. As mentioned before, there is an implicit assumption in mo

197

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
that once a policy has been "made" by a government, the policy will be implemented
and the desired results of the policy will be near those expected by the policymakers.1
This assumption rests upon certain political and organizational conditions. However,
these conditions may not be found in all societies. Indeed, the societies of the Third
World often are devoid of all or some of these conditions.

Recent interpretations of politics in Asian and African nations have indicated that,
unlike in many Western nations, the governmental policies seldom are the result of
demands and pressures by interested parties. As James C. Scott has written, "The open
clash of organized interests is often conspicuously absent during the formation of
legislation in these nations."2 Indeed, the channels for such influence (political parties
and interest groups) may be undeveloped or suppressed by official governmental
action. Governments will initiate policies often without consultation with the
interested or affected individuals or groups. According to Scott,

To conclude from this, however, that the public has little or no effect on the eventual
"output" of government would be completely unwarranted. Between the passage of
legislation and its actual implementation lies an entirely different political arena that ...
has a great effect on the execution of policy.3

The real role of interest groups and other interested groups, including political
parties, comes when the policies are implemented by the government. It is at the
implementation stage of the policy process when the policy may be abandoned by the
government, implemented or modified to meet the demands of the interested parties.
This process represents a radical departure from that found in many Western nations.
Interests and opposition in Western societies focus upon the policymakers. If a policy
is made (or not made) the various interests know that this decision will be implemented.
And often there is little they can do about it at that stage. Research and theory building
also has focused on the "inputs" or upon the processes by which policies are made.
However, in Third World nations the emphasis by interested parties is upon the policy
itself or upon the bureaucrats who must implement the policy.4
Even if a government of a Third World nation is committed to the implementation
of a particular policy, the bureaucracy that must implement the policy often is lacking
in the capacity to implement.5 This situation usually is not found in Western societies.

1 Citizens also make this assumption. According to Dye, "We assume that when Congress adopts
a policy and appropriates money for it, and when the executive branch organizes a program, hires
people, spends money, and carries out activities designed to implement the policy, the effects of the
policy will be felt by society and the effects will be those intended by the policy." Thomas R, Dye,
Understanding Public Policy (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972), p. 291.
2 James C. Scott, "Corruption, Machine Politics, and Political Change," American Political Science
Review 63 (December 1969), p. 1142,
3 Ibid., p. 1142.
4 Scott writes, "Influence at the enforcement stage often takes the form of 'corruption' and has
seldom been treated as the alternative means of interest articulation which in fact it is." Ibid., p. 1142.
For three cases of interest concentration upon policy implementation in India, see Robert W. Stern,
The Process of Opposition in India (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970).
5 On administrative capacity in Third World nations, see Ralph Briabanti, ed., Political and
Administrative Development (Durham: Duke University Press, 1969); Fred W. Riggs, Administration
in Developing Countries (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1964); and Edward W. Weidner, ed., Development
Administration in Asia (Durham: Duke University Press, 1970).

198

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
Generally, the Western bureaucracies are relatively efficient and effective in policy
implementation. For the Third World nations a myriad of factors can contribute to
the emasculation of any government policy: lack of qualified personnel, insufficient
direction and control from political leaders, opposition to the policy itself, corruption,
etc. The process by which the government made the policy may have been the most
rational, elaborate, "modern" method. But this may not be meaningful if the
administrators cannot implement it.
One reason the bureaucracies in the Third World nations find it difficult to im-
plement governmental policies is the nature of the policies which these political
systems must formulate. Policies in Western nations tend to be incremental in nature.6
Normally, the policies deviate little from past policies in the same area of concern.
The fact is that the Third World nations have not been able to afford the luxury of
incremental policymaking. Policies tend to be ambitious, sweeping programs designed
to bring about development and social reform.7 This was especially true in the years
immediately following independence or the overthrow of traditional rulers. Budgets
soared, massive new programs were formulated, and foreign assistance money,
advisors, and packaged programs penetrated the policymaking systems. I think it is
accepted knowledge that incremental policies are much easier to implement than are
ambitious non-incremental ones. Therefore, many policies in the non-Western nations
have not met with success in attaining their objectives.
The problems of policy implementation may be more widespread than commonly
acknowledged. Modern Western nations such as the United States may have difficulty
implementing certain kinds of programs, especially if the programs are of a new, non-
incremental nature. The experience of America's War on Poverty programs bears this
out.8 In another policy area, Schneider, in his case study of urban mass transport,
notes that "There may be legal or technical difficulties in implementation."9 He points
out that,

Too often the public reads that the most modern transportation system in the world has
been approved, but a year later finds that the new system is little different from the un-
pleasant existing lines. In these situations, it is not surprising that the feedback to decision
makers results in unfavorable attitudes toward future mass-transportation projects.10

Models of policymaking have not taken seriously enough the importance of policy
implementation in the analysis of public policy. For the policy process in the Third
World nations, the implementation of policies is an acute phase in the process. I
contend that we must re-evaluate the importance of policy implementation if we are
to explain policy processes or to seek to inform policymakers on how they should go
about making policy. The model of the policy implementation process outlined in this

6 Dror points out that policies in Western nations normally are politically and economically
feasible. Y. Dror, Public Policy-making Reexamined (San Francisco: Chandler, 1968), p. 89.
7 Ibid., pp. 109-110.
8 See Thomas Dye's evaluation of the innovative social programs in his Understanding Public Policy,
op. cit. Also see, Daniel P. Moynihan, Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding (New York: Free Press,
1969).
9 Lewis M. Schneider, "Urban Mass-Transportation: A Survey of the Decision-Making Process,"
in Raymond A. Bauer and Kenneth J. Gergen, eds., The Study of Policy Formation (New York: Free
Press, 1968), p. 277. 10 Ibid., pp. 277-278.

199

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
paper is a step in that direction. I will outline a model of the implementation process
and identify the key variables in that process.

Change and Governmental Policy

In order to develop a model of the policy implementation process, it is essential to
view the policy process from the point of view of social and political change. Govern-
mental policies are designed to induce changes in society.1l By the implementation of
governmental policies, old patterns of interaction and institutions are abolished or
modified and new patterns of action and institutions are created. Governmental
policies may be designed to result in sweeping changes in life styles, or they may be
incremental in nature and deviate little from past policies. But each policy is an
attempt by a government to induce changes in patterns of interaction between or
within individuals, groups or institutions. With this perspective as the basis of a model
of policy implementation, the process of societal change can be examined for concepts
and approaches that will provide insights into the policy implementation process.
It is useful to view society and policy processes in systemic terms. However, one of
the general problems with the use of systems theory in the social sciences has been the
static quality of the systems models.12 The analytic systems developed were not geared
to the explanation of change processes except as related to the maintenance of
equilibrium within the system. In a recent, lucid book Walter Buckley concentrates
upon the "other side" of systems analysis-the change processes within social
systems.13 His interpretation is immensely useful in the analysis of policy processes.
Buckley defines two aspects of system regulation:
Morphostasis-refers to those processes in complex systems-environment changes
that tend to preserve or maintain the system's given form, organization, or state.14
Morphogenesis-refers to those processes which tend to elaborate or change a
system's given form, structure or stage.15
Buckley then develops a model of the morphogenic process. In this model the root
cause of changes in society is identified:
The internal source of dynamics for the ongoing process is the continuous generation of
varying degrees of tension, "stress," or "strain" within and between the interacting
components; such tension is now being recognized as an inherent and essential char-
acteristic of such systems.16

There are a number of other social scientists who identify the major initiating factor
of societal change to be the tensions within and between components of a society.
Robert Chin, in a brief essay, writes of the sources of tensions in society:
We find built-in differences, gaps of ignorance, misperceptions, or differential perspectives,

11 For comprehensive definitions of public policy, see Austin Ranney, "The Study of Policy
Content," in Austin Ranney, ed., Political Science and Public Policy (Chicago: Markham, 1968), p. 7.
Also see Dror, op. cit., pp. 12-17.
12 See A. P. Hall and R. E. Eagen, "Definition of a System," General Systems, 1 (1956), 18-28.
Also see Oran R. Young, Systems of Political Science (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968).
13 Walter Buckley, Sociology and Modern Systems Analysis (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,
1967). 14 Ibid., p. 58. -5 Ibid., p. 58. 16 Ibid., p. 129.

200

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
 internal changes in a component, reactive adjustments and defenses, and the requirement
of system survival generating tensions.17
The importance of identifying societal tensions is noted by Chin:
The identification of and analysis of how tensions operate in a system are by all odds the
major utility of systems analysis for practitioners of change. The dynamics of a living
system are exposed for observation through utilizing the concept of tension, stress and
strain, and conflict.18
George K. Zollschan provides a more comprehensive model of how societal tensions
result in changes in society. Zollschan and his associates prefer to use the term
"exigency" in place of tensions. An exigency is defined as "a discrepancy (for a person)
between a consciously or unconsciously desired or expected state of affairs and an
actual situation."19 Zollschan identifies three main types of discrepancies which may,
alone or in combination, make up an exigency:20
1. A discrepancy between a legitimate pattern or arrangement and an actual situation.
2. A discrepancy between a prediction (or explanation or expectation) and an
observation.
3. A discrepancy between a desired objective and what is actually achieved.
Exigencies (tensions) are linked directly with changes in society. Zollschan postulates
that tensions "must trigger a series of phase processes."21 The phase process is outlined
in Figure 1.

Tensions in

' - 4 , Articulation - Action - Institutions

Society

Fig. 1. The Zollschan institutionalization model.

Zollschan defines the phase articulation as "the recognition ... of the existence of
the exigency and the postulation of goals for its removal, prevention, or ameliora-
tion."22 After tensions have been articulated and recognized, the tensions may then
be referred to as "needs." Action is defined by Zollschan as "locomotion toward
postulated or unconscious goals."23 Whether or not action will or will not take place
depends upon the nature of the tensions and the social and political system in which
the tension and articulation is taking place. The final state, "institutionalization," is
conceptualized by Zollschan as the change in old, stable, crystallized patterns of
interaction and/or the substitution of newly crystallized patterns for old patterns.24
Zollschan's phase model has many merits; however, several modifications must be
made before it will have utility in explaining the implementation of policy. That
17 Robert Chin, "The Utility of System Models and Development Models," in Jason L. Finkle and
Richard W. Gable, eds., Political Development and Social Change (New York: John Wiley and Sons,
1966), p. 12. 18 Ibid., p. 14.
19 George K. Zollschan, "Working Papers on the Theory of Institutionalization," in
Zollschan and Walter Hirsch, eds., Explorations in Social Change (Boston: Houghton Miff
p. 89. 20 Zollschan regards exigencies as occurring only at the individual level
21 Ibid., p. 89. 22 Ibid., p. 90. 23 Ibid., p. 91.
24 For other, related definitions of the concept of institutionalization, see Bertram G
Management of Organizations (New York: Free Press, 1964); Philip Selznick, Leadership in A
tion (Evanstan, Ill.: Row, Peterson and Co., 1957); and Buckley, op. cit.

201

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
tensions are the chief causal factors in the change process is accepted. But the chain
process of articulation to action should be examined more closely. Perhaps the phase
between tensions and institutions should be bridged by a more general phase which
can be called the transaction phase. Within this phase, the tensions concerned could
be articulated and could manifest themselves in new behavioral patterns and new
relationships. These patterns of action might or might not become permanent,
institutionalized patterns. Most societal tensions probably do not end in the institu-
tionalization of new patterns and relationships, but result only in the creation of
uncrystallized action patterns which I will call transactions.

Tensions in

---- Transactions -- Institutions

Society

Feedback Phase

Fig. 2. A general model of the change process.

Another consideration in the process of change concerns the never-ending process

of tension generation. Newly created transaction patterns or institutions may be the
catalyst for new and powerful tensions which may be supportive or disruptive to the
new or modified patterns of relationships. With this in mind a feedback phase must
be added to the model of the societal change process. The modified model is dia-
grammed in Figure 2. In this model societal tensions can result in transaction patterns
which, in turn, may or may not result in their institutionalization. The transaction
patterns and institutions may generate tensions which may cause further modifications
in their structure or processes.

The Policy Implementation Process

Governmental policies have been defined as deliberate action by a government to
establish new transaction patterns or institutions or to change established patterns
within old institutions. Policy formulated by a government, then, serves as a tension-
generating force in society. While policies are implemented, tensions, strains and
conflicts are experienced by those who are implementing the policy and by those
affected by the policy. The tensions generated by the implementation of policies may
cause transaction patterns and, in some instances, the establishment of institutions
required for the realization of policy goals. Also, the process of policy implementation
may generate tensions that trigger changes in other related institutions.25 It is im-
portant to note that institutions need not emerge from every government policy that
is implemented. Transaction patterns may be the only result.
Once public policies are regarded as tension generating forces in society, it is a
necessary step to consider the context of the implementation of policies-the policy
relevant components which form the tension generating matrix. I wish to identify four
such components which are important in the policy implementation process: (1) the
idealized policy, (2) the implementing organization, (3) the target group, and (4) environ-
mentalfactors. Figure 3 represents the model of the policy implementation process.
25 See Dye, op. cit., pp. 291-299.

202

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
 The model presented in Figure 3 represents the central core of the policy implementa-
tion process. As policy is implemented, interaction within and between the components
of the policy implementation system result in discrepancies and tensions. The tensions
result in transaction patterns-non-permanent patterns related to the aims and goals
of the policy. The transaction patterns may or may not result in institutionalization.
Feedback in the form of relieved tensions or increased tension is introduced back into
the tension generation matrix from transaction patterns and institutions.

|Implemention - - -- Tget
1 r ~~~ ~ ~Organization -- - - Group
POLICYMAKING
PROCESS POLICY | Idealized Policy TENSIONS

, I Envronmental Factors
ATRANSACTIONS

F:EEIDBACK -- -- INSTITUTIONS

Fig. 3. A model of the policy implementation process.

In the remainder of the paper I will add to the policy imple

identifying the major variables in each of the components of
Secondly, I will attempt to further define the concept of tensions
relevant to policy implementation. Lastly, I will elaborate u
institutions and feedback phases of the model.

The Idealized Policy

The idealized policy is defined as the idealized patterns of i
policymakers are attempting to induce. There are four relevant c
of the idealized policy.
The Formal Policy-The formal decisional statement, law, o
government is attempting to implement. In short, what form do
The Type of Policy-The type of policy can be of three categorie
(a) Policies may be complex or they may be simple in nature. T
similar to broad, non-incremental policies and small-scale increm
(b) Policies may be categorized as organizational or non-o
organizational policy requires the modification (or the establish
organization.26 Non-organizational policies, on the other hand,
ment of patterns of interaction outside the formal organization
(c) Policies also may be classified as distributive, re-distributiv
regulatory, or emotive-symbolic.27

26 To use an Indian example, the implementation of the Panchayati Ra

establishment of formal organizations such as village, block and district
block panchayat may introduce policies of taxation that would not require t
formal organization.
27 Regarding the utility of a policy-arena type classification, see Theo
Business, Public Policy, Case Studies and Political Theory," World Politics 1
Robert H. Salisbury, "The Analysis of Public Policies," in Austin Ranney, e

203
15

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
 The Program-There are three aspects of the program of the policy:
(a) Intensity of support. The degree to which the government is committed to the
implementation of the policy.28
(b) The source of the policy. Is the policy required to satisfy needs and demands
in the society or was it formulated with little demand or support ?29
(c) Scope. Is the policy broad in nature and universal in scope or is it a con-
centration upon a small geographic or subject area?30
Images of the Policy-It is essential to consider the images the policy invokes in the
society. The images of those affected by the policy and those who implement the policy
are most important.31

The Target Group

The target group is defined as those who are required to adapt new patterns of
interaction by the policy.32 They are the people within organizations or groups most
affected by the policy. It is they who must change to meet the demands of the policy.
Several factors are relevant here:
1. The degree of organization or institutionalization of the target group.33
2. The leadership of the target group. Leadership can be aligned for or against the
policy. Or the leadership may be indifferent to the policy. The nature of the leadership
is also important.
3. The prior policy experience of the target group. Has the group been affected by
governmental policies in the past? What has been their experience and response to
governmental policy. Are they compliant, rebellious or indifferent?34

The Implementing Organization

The implementing organization is responsible for the implementation of the policy.
In most instances, the organization is a unit of the governmental bureaucracy.35 There
are three key variables to consider in the implementation of policy.

Public Policy (Chicago: Markham, 1968), pp. 151-175; and T. Alexander Smith, "Towards a Com-
parative Theory of the Policy Processes," Comparative Politics 1 (July 1969), 498-515.
28 Fred Riggs has noted the distinction between goals and policy. He contends that much of what
passes for "policy" in developing nations should be called "goals." Goals are not meant to be seriously
implemented. See Riggs, op. cit., pp. 332-334.
29 One aspect of this variable refers to foreign aid programs. See Eugene B. Mihaly's interpretation
of the impact of massive foreign assistance on Nepal. Eugene B. Mihaly, Foreign Aid and Politics in
Nepal (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965).
30 In this regard, see Lewis A. Froman, "An Analysis of Public Policies in Cities," Journal of
Politics 29 (February 1967), 94-108.
31 In regard to the images of the American poverty program, see Aaron Wildavsky, "The Empty-
Headed Blues: Black Rebellion and White Reaction," The Public Interest 4 (Spring 1968).
32 Dye, op. cit., p. 292.
33 A number of studies have indicated that the more highly institutionalized a group or organization,
the more difficult it is to initiate change.
34 One wonders how receptive the American low-income, black, ghetto dweller will be to future
government programs. Surely, their current attitudes toward future policy have been influenced by
past policies.
35 I do not wish to revive the old policy-administration dichotomy. An implementing organization
may have been in the role of policymaker. The organization can implement its own policy.

204

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
 1. The structure andpersonnel-The stability of the structure and the qualifications
of the personnel who must implement the policy are important to understanding
implementation. An unstable administrative organization and unqualified personnel
may reduce the capacity to implement.
2. The leadership of the administrative organization-This variable, like the leader-
ship of the target group, refers to the style and nature of the leadership.
3. The implementing program and capacity-The program and capacity of the
implementing organization refers to the intensity and care taken to organize for the
implementation and to the general capacity of the organization to meet the objectives
of program implementation.

Environmental Factors

The environmental factors are those factors which can influence or be influenced
by the policy implementation.36 Environmental factors can be thought of as a sort of
constraining corridor through which the implementation of policy must be forced.
For differing kinds of policy, differing cultural, social, political, and economic
conditions may prevail. For example, in policies related to local self-government in
Third World nations, the basic cultural and social life-styles at the village level may
be an environmental constraint of great magnitude.

Tensions

After identifying the major component categories within the policy implementation
processes, it is in order to explore further the nature of tensions. Tensions may occur
both within and between the four component categories of idealized policy, implement-
ing organization, target group, and environmental factors. An example of a within-
component tension would be the discrepancy in the implementing organization when
an administrative unit is instructed to implement a policy for which the unit has
inadequate personnel in numbers or skills for policy execution. A between-component
tension may occur between the target group and the ideal policy component when the
policymakers expect a policy to be welcomed by the target group and the actual
reception is a hostile one.
It is necessary to examine at what societal level tensions may be prevalent. Zollschan,
in his model, conceives of tensions only at the individual level. His argument is that all
systemic tensions can be reduced to those felt by individuals. This restriction is unduly
harsh and need not be followed in studying policy implementation. In addition to
tensions of an individual nature, there also can be tensions on the group level. Although,
in analysis, group tensions may be reduced to individuals within the group, it may be
more meaningful to speak of group tensions. For example, the clerks in a government
department may feel that they are underpaid and overworked. But their supervisor
may be convinced that they are overpaid and underworked. In cases such as this it is
proper to speak of the clerks and supervisors as groups rather than as individuals.
Tensions can be identified also at the formal structural level. For instance any office,
in order to carry out a policy, must contain enough qualified personnel to do the task.

36 See Riggs, op. cit., pp. 426-429.

205

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
If the office is understaffed, the assigned tasks cannot be completed. A definite tension
is prevalent and can be operationalized if the level of structure is taken into considera-
tion. Tensions, then, can be conceptualized at the individual, group or structural
levels. But, as Zollschan rightly points out, the tensions are all reduceable to the
individual level.
Zollschan, in his model of social change discusses three types of discrepancies.
However, these categories must be expanded for applicability in policy implementa-
tion. The tension matrix presented in Table 1 is more comprehensive and more
applicable than the one proposed by Zollschan. Within the tension framework there
are ten types of discrepancies which can occur at three different levels (individual,
group, and structure).
TABLE 1

Policy Implementation Tension Matrix

Ideal Actual Perceived Expected

Ideal 7 1 2 3
Actual 8 4 5
Perceived 9 6
Expected 10

Type 1. A discrepan
In an ideal situation
for that office. Th
tension of a structu
exists.
Type 2. A discrepancy between an ideal state and a perceived situation. Example: At
the individual level a district administrator may perceive a village leader as ignorant
and resistant to change. The administrator may wish for the ideal situation in which
village leaders would be well informed and welcome change in their villages.
Type 3. A discrepancy between an ideal situation and an expected situation. Example:
The ideal situation in village level planning is for village governing bodies to make
plans that will be implemented. The district officer in charge of planning may not
expect village governments to be able to implement any of their plans.
Type 4. A discrepancy between actual and perceived situations. Example: A district
political leader may perceive of the police in his district as unfairly engaging in
political repression. The actual situation may be that the police are dispensing with
their duties in an impartial and restrained manner.
Type 5. A discrepancy between an actual situation and an expected situation. Example:
A researcher from the central government might expect to find records kept at a
district office to be orderly and up-to-date. The actual record-keeping by a district
office may fall short of this.
Type 6. A discrepancy between an expected situation and a perceived situation.
Example: An official sent by a central government to help a lower level governmental

206

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
unit formulate a plan of action may expect the personnel of the lower unit to be
appreciative of his help and implement his suggestions. The official may receive
shabby treatment because his suggestions are not good ones. But he may perceive
that the poor treatment results from his caste or class background.
Tensions can occur within the ideal, actual, perceived or expected categories. If
individuals, groups or structures within the system have varying images regarding the
variables in the category, discrepancies can occur. Discrepancies of this type have been
numbered types 7, 8, 9 and 10 in the discrepancy matrix in Table 1.
The following would be an example of a discrepancy of this type. Within the
"ideal" category a national planning commission may have in mind an ideal state of
regional planning in which all key decisions regarding the style and rate of regional
growth would be determined by the national planning commission. The regional
leaders, however, may have in mind an ideal regional planning system whereby the
regional governments are autonomous and determine the style and rate of development
in their areas.
The ten types of discrepancies, then, can be prevalent at the individual, group and
structural levels. And the discrepancies may occur within each of the four implementa-
tion contextual components or between the components. By operationalizing the
concept of tension in this way, the tensions within the policy implementation frame-
work, though varied and complex in nature, can be identified and measured in
intensity.

Transaction Patterns

Transaction patterns have been identified as uncrystallized patterns of interaction.

These patterns are responses to the tensions, stresses and strains within and between
the component parts of the policy implementation context. The patterns, at this stage,
do not have the permanence of institutions.
The transaction phase of the policy implementation process is important. Many
times governmental policy is intended to result only in transaction patterns and not
in the establishment of permanent institutions. And even though institution building
may be one of the prime goals of a governmental policy, institutions may not be
formed. Particular attention must be paid to whether or not the policy is being
implemented. In Third World nations, as well as in many of the developed
Western ones, there are many "idealized" policies written into law or placed in the
constitution.37 Programs supported in a half-hearted way often are never implemented
with vigor. In these cases, the transaction behavior seldom results in the attainment
of the desired objectives of the policy.
In exploring the properties of the transaction phase of the policy implementation
process, the researcher should attempt to identify the actions that emerge when the
policy is being implemented. In examining a policy which requires the establishment
of a popularly elected local governmental unit, one might examine manifestations of
response to tensions in the way the members of the unit are chosen, the unit's relation-
ship with the dominant administrative sector in the area, and the unit's ability to

37 Ibid., pp. 15-19. Riggs calls this "formalism."

207

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
satisfy prescribed functions. Also to be taken into account would be the initial
relationships between the local unit and the population it is supposed to represent.

Institutions

Since the policy implementation process is an ongoing process, it is difficult to

determine when (if ever) interaction patterns become firmly crystallized into institu-
tions. The exact degree of institutionalization is difficult to determine, but several
measures can serve as guidelines. These are:38
1. The institution's ability to survive in its environment.
2. The extent to which the institution is viewed by surrounding societal components
to have value (both autonomy and influence).
3. Whether the relationship patterns become normative for other social components.
It should be stressed that it is a simple process for governments to establish adminis-
trative or political organizations for the purpose of policy implementation. The
structural arrangement functions with the support of the government that established
it. Whether the organization eventually turns into an institution is another matter. A
test of an established organization's institutionality is whether demands for the
activity would be sufficient to force its continuance.39
In the policy implementation process a methodology for determining whether a
policy meets its objectives might be to examine the newly established patterns or
institutions in comparison with the operation of the "idealized" policy goals of its
creators. In order to do this, the idealized policy's functions and relationships can be
itemized and then compared with the actual outcome of the implementation process.
It is possible that in some instances the patterns of the idealized policy have never
materialized or that the outcome of the change process has been to crystallize patterns
of resistance to the idealized policy's program and goals.40
In considering the degree of institutionalization, the time factor must be taken into
account. Complex, non-incremental policies may take more time for patterns to
institutionalize than would simple incremental policies. Although it may be impossible
to predict how long it takes for certain processes to become institutionalized, enough
time should be allowed for definite patterns to emerge before conclusions are made
regarding the institutional outcomes of policy implementation. It should be considered
that the policy implementation process as indicated by this model contends that the
policy process is a continuous one that may or may not have a final definite end.

Feedback

Once transaction patterns emerge or institutionalization occurs, they can serve as

tension generating entities. The tensions can-though not always-relate back to the
implementation matrix of the idealized policy, target group, implementing organiza-

38 From Milton J. Esman and Hans C. Blaise, "Institution Building Research: Some Guiding
Concepts," National Institute of Public Administration Journal (Karachi) 5 (June 1966), 88-98.
39 Agencies or departments established may soon appear to gain a life of their own. See F. E. Rourke,
Bureaucracy, Politics and Public Policy (Boston: Little, Brown, 1969).
40 See Dye, op. cit., pp. 291-299.

208

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]
tion and environmental factors.41 By the creation of new patterns and new institutions,
tensions may be generated which could lead to further changes within the system. In
this regard, there is no assurance that the former state of the system will come into
existence again. There is also no guarantee that there will be a distinct end to any
implementation process. The new tensions may be supportive or disruptive to the new
patterns and institutions brought about by the policy implementation. An example of
disruptive tensions might be the case of the establishment of a viable system of
autonomous local government able to process all problems of its area. An efficient
and effective functioning of this local government system may evoke tension from
some ruling leaders at the national level who felt that local units should be tightly
controlled by the central government. In this case, the new tensions created might lead
to the reshaping of governmental policy and the issuance of instructions to adminis-
trative units to exercise more control over local government.
With the feedback process built into the model, it becomes difficult to speak of the
"end product" of a policy implementation process. The feedback phase is an im-
portant part of the model because it clearly indicates that the policy process is an
ongoing, continuous process that may never have a final and definite end.

Conclusions

Given the importance of understanding the total policy process, it is essential that the
implementation process be explored and evaluated. The model presented in this paper
-while tentative in nature-is one method of explaining the process. Surely more
variables (and relationships between variables) can be added to the model as more
research and thinking is devoted to the implementation process.
An implication of the model for the making and execution of policy is that policy-
makers (especially those in Third World nations) should devote more effort to under-
standing and mastering implementation strategies. Cost-benefit analysis may not be
enough to ensure that policy outcomes match policy expectations. Policymakers, by
utilizing this model, can attempt to minimize discrepancies in the implementation
process and, with this goal in mind, can formulate and apply more effective policies.

41 For some examples of American policy cycles, see Charles O. Jones, An Introduction to the Studv
of Public Policy (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1970), pp. 107-134.

209

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Fri, 05 Sep 2025 07:14:25 UTC
All use subject to [Link]