Skip to main content

Analyzing Policy Issues of High Uncertainty and Complexity

  • Chapter
Taking Complexity Seriously
  • 97 Accesses

Abstract

One of the more famous typologies in organization theory comes from the work of Thompson and Tuden (Thompson 1967): Simply put, when there is agreement over means and ends, computation is often the preferred decisionmaking strategy. When there is agreement over the means but not the ends, bargaining is preferred. When goals are agreed upon but not the means to achieve them, then majority judgment becomes the way the parties frequently proceed to decision. And when no agreement over means and ends exist, then the parties have only inspiration to get themselves out of the mess in which they find themselves.

So why is management consultancy doing so well? The answer can be summed up in two words: complexity and uncertainty. Complexity creates confusion; uncertainty creates fear; and both create a booming demand for outside advice. The Economist, March 22 1997

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Attfield, C.L.F., D. Demery and N.W. Duck (1991 [1985]), Rational Expectations in Macroeconomics: An Introduction to Theory and Evidence, Second Edition, Blackwell, Oxford, United Kingdom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Averch, Harvey and Milan Dluhy (1992), “Teaching Public Administration, Public Management, and Policy Analysis: Convergence or Divergence in the Masters Core,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 11(3), pp. 541–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardach, Eugene (1992), “Problem-Solving in the Public Sector,” a handout, pp. 1–30 (with appendix), Graduate School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, Antoine, Hanna Damasio, Daniel Tranel, and Antonio R. Damasio (1997), “Deciding Advantageously Before Knowing the Advantageous Strategy,” Science, Vol. 275, 28 February, pp. 1293–1295.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, Isaiah (1991), “Alleged Relativism in Eighteenth-Century European Thought,” in his The Crooked Timber of Humanity (Henry Hardy, ed), Alfred Knopf, New York, pp. 70–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandi, John (1989), “Interchange by John Quigley, Suzanne Scotchmer, John Brandi, Robert Behn and Isabel Sawhill on cost-benefit analysis and its alternatives,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 8(3), pp. 482–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Donald and Julian Stanley (1963) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research, Rand McNally College Publishing Co., Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, Robert (1983), Rural Development: Putting the Last First, Longman, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, Robert (1992), “Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory,” IDS Discussion Paper 311, Sussex, pp. 1–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, David and Janet Weiss (1977), “Social Science and Social Policy: Schools and Race,” in Using Social Research in Public Policy Making (Carol Weiss, ed), Lexington Books, Toronto, pp. 67–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demchak, Chris (1991), Military Organizations, Complex Machines, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earl, Peter and Neil Kay (1992), “How Economists Can Accept Shackle’s Critique of Economic Doctrines Without Arguing Themselves Out of Their Jobs,” in Joan Robinson (1903-1983) and George Shackle (1903-1992) (Mark Blaug, ed), An Elgar Reference Collection, Aldershot, England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, Martha and James March (1988), “Information in Organizations as Signal and Symbol,” in James March’s Decisions and Organizations, Basil Blackwell, pp. 409–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, Jonathan and Steve Rayner (1985), Measuring Culture, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallberg, M.C. (1992), Policy for American Agriculture, Iowa State University Press, Ames.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, Eric (1990), “The Policy Research Markets,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 9(2), pp. 146–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heifetz, Ronald, Riley Sinder, Alice Jones, Lynn Hodge, and Keith Rowley (1989), “Teaching and Assessing Leadership Courses at the John F. Kennedy School of Government,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 8(3), pp. 536–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, Frank (1986), “Introduction and Overview,” in The Use and Abuse of Social Science (Frank Heller, ed), Sage Publications, London, pp. 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, Ian (1992), “On Michael Oakeshott,” Government and Opposition 27(2), 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Journal of Human Resources (1990) Interchange by Henry Aaron, Edward Gramlich, Eric Hanushek, James Heckman and Aaron Wildavsky, 25(2), pp. 276–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Journal of Policy Analysis and Management (1989) Interchange by John Quigley, Suzanne Scotchmer, John Brandi, Robert Behn and Isabel Sawhill on cost-benefit analysis and its alternatives, 8(3), pp. 482–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Journal of Policy Analysis and Management (1992 and 1993) Interchange by Donald Rosenthal, Robert Nelson, Raymond Kopp, and John Quiggin on including or excluding existence values in cost-benefit analysis, 11(1), pp. 116–129; and 12(1), pp. 195-199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, James (1993), “Science, Technology, and Congress,” Society 30(4), pp. 41–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J.W. (1984), Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, Little/Brown, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krieger, Martin (1988), “The Inner Game of Writing,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 7(2), pp. 408–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, Roger (1992), Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majone, Giandomenico (1989) Evidence, Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process, Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 55–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, James and Johan Olsen (1986), “Garbage Can Models of Decision Making in Organizations,” in Ambiguity and Command (James March et al, eds), Pitman Publishing, Marshfield, MA, pp. 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meltsner, Arnold (1986 [1976]) Policy Analysts in the Bureaucracy, California University Press, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milberg, William (1993), “Natural Order and Posmodernism in Economic Thought,” Social Research 60(2), pp. 255–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan, Richard (1988), Social Science in Government: Uses and Abuses, Basic Books, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neustadt, Richard and Ernest May (1986), Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for Decision-makers, Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, Charles (1984), Normal Accidents: Living With High Risk Technologies, Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressman, Jeffrey and Aaron Wildavsky (1984 [1973]), Implementation, University of California Press, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, Hilary (1983), “Cultural Relativism and Cultural Imperialism,” in his Realism and Reason: Philosophical Papers, Volume 3, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 234–240.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, Charles (1992), “Introduction: Cases of ‘What is a case?’,” in What is a Case?:Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry (Charles Ragin and Howard Becker, eds), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roe, Emery (1994), Narrative Policy Analysis, Duke University Press, Durham, NC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, J. and M. Durfee (1995), Thinking Theory Thoroughly, Westview Press, Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, Peter and James Wright (1984), “Evaluation Research: An Assessment,” from The Annual Review of Sociology, Annual Reviews Inc, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 331–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, Giovanni (1989), “Undercomprehension,” in Government and Opposition 24(4), pp. 391–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SCR 43 Task Force (1989), “Executive Summary,” to its The Challenge: Latinos in a Changing California, University of California, Irvine, pp. ES 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senate Office of Research (1989) criticism of SCR 43 Task Force Report, pp. 1-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackle, G.L.S. (1969), Decision, Order and Time in Human Affairs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 277–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackle, G.L.S. (1988), “The Origination of Choice,” in his Business, Time and Thought, Macmillan, London, pp. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Social Science Agricultural Agenda Project (1991), “Executive Summary,” to its Social Science Agricultural Agendas and Strategies (G. Johnson et al), Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, MI, pp. 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, Roy (1992), Thought Experiments, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, Gary (1990), “Learning to Teach With Cases,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 9(2), pp. 297–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, James D. (1967). Organizations in Action, New York, McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi, W. Kip (1992), Fatal Tradeoffs, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, George (1997), “Researchers on Complexity Ponder What It’s All About,” New York Times, Science Times, Tuesday May 6, B9, B-13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, James Q. (1989) Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It, Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (1992), The World Bank and the Environment, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Roe, E. (1998). Analyzing Policy Issues of High Uncertainty and Complexity. In: Taking Complexity Seriously. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5497-4_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5497-4_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7511-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-5497-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics