Are the Principles and Processes of Coordination the Same Across All Areas of Government - Assignment Example

Name Coordination Course: Tutor: Institution: Date: 1. Are the principles and processes of coordination the same across all areas of government? The principles of coordination vary across different areas of government although I understand that some of the principles are shared. This is because each unt and area of the government has different responsibility in the formulation and execution of public polcies. As such, the nature and type of the public policy under coordination influence the principle execution. The key shared principle of coordination across the government areas is the fisrt principle of early start. Under this principle, I gather that all coordination practices across government agencies start at the planning stages. Thus, irrespective of the government unit ranging form the military to the social services units, a successful coordination process is preceded by proper planning. My understanding of this rationale is that the planning phase of the coordination process enables the government units to develop a framework through which a public policy is coordinated. For instance, at the stage, the respective government areas desied on the form of coordination toadopt slecting from the horizontal and the vertical coordination approaches among other alternatives. Further, I highly believe that the early start principle and the planning stage allow the respective government units and areas to develop an analysis and gather the required rsources for the coordination process. I belive that whoever small a public policy could be in terms of coordination needs, it requires a wide range of resources to support its coordination and thus the reason as to why the principle of early strt and planning is common and applies to all the government areas equally. However, different government areas apply and honour the principle of direct contact. In this case, the principle application depends the are coordination approach adopted. On one hand, if the government area applies a central command approach in its coordination process, the principle is applied through the development and retention of relationships and communication through the command chain. This form of principle application is especially common in the coordination of policies by the law enforcement agencies where discipline and flow of information is distinct and follows the set hierarchy order. In this case, the communication and information sharing principle application is limited due to the sensitivity of the policies often coordinated by the function. On the other hand, if the government areas such as the social services unit that apply the partisan mutual adjustment coordination approach, the principle is executed through inter agencies communication. In this case, instead of directly relating and retaining contact with the impacted society members alone, the areas have to establish communication systems with other agencies and stakeholders involved. I believe that due to the high number of stakeholders such agencies have to contend and relate with, their application and absorption of the principle is highly elaborate in such areas. Finally, under the principles application, I believe that the application of the principle of continuity is different across the government areas. In this case, the principle respect is based on the nature of the coordinated policies. While as it is applied and upheld for the coordination of repetitive policies, it is not applicable for government areas mandated with the coordination of a one off policy that is specific to a given situation and period and non repetitive. 2. Do joined-up and whole-of-government strategies offer viable approaches to the Problems of coordination in the formulation and delivery of public policies? To the best of my understanding the adoption of joined up and whole of government practices have enhanced the resolution of the pertinent problems and challenges in the coordination of public policies formulation and implementation. However, I feel that some of the challenges are yet to be resolved fully by the current systems. One of the challenges I feel that the systems adoption has resolved is the problem of Lunacae. In this case, the lunacae problem emerges when one of the functions and responsibilities of the coordination process lacks a responsible agency. This problem initially occurred as a result of the partisan mutual adjustment approach application by the government agencies. In this regard, the reluctance by each of the departments and poor communication systems led to the coordination failure where some of the coordination process responsibilities were uncovered for. I understand that the new process in policy coordination allows for the development of shared information centers as well as the use of IT systems to integrate the various government agencies. As such, this allows for an increased scrutiny and ease of the process audit by the shared agencies committees, a move that has played a role in reducing the overall failure and lunacae problem occurrence. Technology application is a vital tool in facilitating communication. In this case, the use of ERP systems has enhanced the sharing of information between government agencies on policy coordination on a real time basis, thus overcoming the traditional communication barrier challenge. In addition, I am of the opinion that the new approach in public policy coordination has played a key role in reducing the problem of redundancy. In this case, the redundancy challenge was a common challenge in multi agency policy coordination, where breakdown of communication led to two agencies handling the same task in the coordination process. Consequently, this resulted to confusion and high policy coordination costs. Through the development of the whole and joined up government systems and the subsequent information sharing seamless system development, there is increased communication and process transparency. As such, the challenge, if it emerges, can be detected at its formative years and corrective measures adopted. However, I have my doubts on the extent and efficiency to which the new coordination systems have resolved the challenge of different policies impacting on the target base differently causing confusion. In this regard, the coordination process is focused mainly on reducing confusion in the management system rather than on the content and comparison on different public policies. Therefore, I argue that in order to overcome this challenge, the government will have to go the extra mile to establish synergy. In this case, I recommend that the government should establish a new coordination center with the sole mandate of evaluation policies synergy in their formulation stage. As such, in the event that the center establishes contrast and antagonizing policies, the coordinating teams should be alerted and a suitable corrective measure applied. Nevertheless, despite the challenge in addressing the final challenge, the use of government joined-up and the use of the whole of government strategies have enhanced increased coordination process success whose positive implications cannot be underrated. 3. Consider the implications for Marsh’s ideas for whole-of-government and joined-up Government. Do you think that we have moved beyond these understandings of good Governing to something new? Professor Marsh perception of the whole of government strategy in policy coordination on formulation and coordination is with reservations. In This case, the professor argued that although the whole of government strategy to policy coordination is a good governance idea, it faces the structural challenges. In this case, he stated that the governemtn structures are designed and developed to hold secrets and to avoid absolute sharing of information, some for the public good and others for government and political interests. My take on this issue is that I agree with the learned Professor. On one hand, I also reckon with the fact that a majority of the government agencies and sectors are run with political motives. Therefore, disclosure and full information sharing by such agencies on the policy execution process is a relatively hard task ad a majority of them shares information sparingly. Therefore, I agree with the fact that in the current government agencies structure, it is not possible to implement the whole government idea fully. I am of the opinion that a key challenge to the application of the whole government strategy is lack of goals and strategic focus synergy between the different government agencies. In this regard, although agencies could be willing to share information and work jointly in policy formulation and implementation, their unshared strategic goals and focus pose a significant challenge. In order to remedy this situation and establish a rational and boundary less government structure, the government agencies should be reconstituted. As such, the high departmentalization approach in the current government should be abolished a more transparent centralized approach developed. In this case, government agencies with shared mandates such as the law enforcement agencies should be managed not as separate entities but as a conglomerate of the agencies through a cross agency team. Through such a management change approach, the government will facilitate the alignment of the respective agencies strategic goals and focus to ensure a shared vision across its agencies. I highly believe that with the development of a proper multi agency team management and goals alignment the strategic goal of the whole of government and joined-up business models will become a reality. Nevertheless, although I agree with the learned Professor on the current government governance situation, I recognize the role the government joined up and whole of government strategies have played a significant and crucial role in increasing public policy coordination efficiency. Read More