Unable to process — no subject content provided

Politics

Sayre's Model of Decision Making holds that a bureau leader in charge of decisions will seek to balance a number of different influences. Interactions among these different actors will be required in order to make a decision. In the Sayre Model, the nine different actors are Congress, political parties, the President, other bureaus, courts, the media, career staff and interest groups. In order to successfully implement of a policy, Sayre argues, the needs of all of these different constituent groups must be met (McCarthy & Aronson, 2001). The bureau leader in this model is the focal point of the issue.

When issues arise, their final implementation will come from a government bureau, and it is the head of this bureau who acts as conduit for information. The different constituent bodies must reach some consensus on the shape of the decision, and that requires them to talk to one another, and to go through the bureau leader. Each of these constituent groups will often have sub-groups. For example, Congress will consist of the House and the Senate. In addition, the relative power that different groups has will vary over time, and it could also vary depending on the situation (McCarthy & Aronson, 2001).

It is the interplay between these different bodies that shapes how any given decision will be made. To implement programs, the bureau leader needs to work with the different stakeholders, negotiate positions and tradeoffs, and build consensus in order to arrive at a decision that is amenable to as many parties as possible, since the success of the action will depend on the contributions of each group towards the decision. The bureau leader must identify the key agents with each constituent group, and work with those individuals specifically. One modern adaptation of the Sayre model holds that because there is a high degree of interconnectedness between bureaus, many actions will require the cooperation of multiple bureaus. Such an interpretation would redesign the wheel with the issue as the hub and the bureaus in the spokes (McCarthy & Aronson, 2001).

2.

There are a number of different approaches to motivating public sector workers. The typical split with respect to motivation types is between intrinsic and extrinsic. In the former, motivation comes from within, and the organization will take steps to foster this motivation. Tactics associated with intrinsic motivation include providing challenging work, providing regular feedback, praise, and aligning the employee with a sense of organizational mission. Leadership is often charged with creating a sense of mission and a sense of motivation within the organization, though this requires an inspirational leader to happen.

Extrinsic motivation is directly related to the provision of rewards from external sources. The employee in this situation is motivated to excel by the promise of something. That something could be a promotion, a raise, a bonus, an employee of the month award, or anything else that the organization dreams up. Sheppard (2009) notes that a one-size-fits-all reward scheme is unlikely to be an effective motivator because employees vary with respect to the rewards they value.

Either of these concepts can be implemented in reverse. The threat of taking something away can be a powerful motivator. If the government is threatening to cut jobs, that could motivate workers to avoid becoming one of the employees deemed expendable. There are limits, however, to what employers can take away -- it is difficult to cut someone's pay, but an automatic raise can be withheld. Public sector organizations need to work within existing legal frameworks if they want to use negative motivation.

3.

One of the reasons for public organization decline is that budgets are becoming increasingly constrained. As governments look to eradicate deficits, it is often organization that fall under discretionary spending categories that bear the brunt of those cuts. Not only does the productive capacity of these organizations suffer but so, too, does morale. With declining funding, public sector organizations also often have difficult recruiting top talent into their organizations.

Another issue that arises with public organization decline is that there is a lack of motivation and a lack of innovation. Innovation in particular is a challenge. When considering Sayre's Model it is not hard to see how excessive bureaucracy can stifle the innovative capabilities of public organizations. Pathak (2007) argues that middle management needs to take a lead role in not only keeping up morale, but encouraging high levels of performance in public organizations as a policy to stem decline.

Cutbacks can be particularly challenging for public organizations. The most important aspect of cutbacks is that management needs to focus the organization on moving forward -- looking back at how things used to be does nobody any good. Cutback management is also more effective when management takes the opportunity to rethink its processes and functions, and make the organization more efficient. If all the manager does is dump the work of a laid-off person onto a survivor's desk, this opportunity is lost, productivity will decline and morale will plummet. Managers must make a full transition to the new operating environment and ensure that their teams are on board as well.

4.

Total quality management (TQM) gained prominence at Toyota in the 1950s and has since been applied to companies around the world, most famously Motorola. The approach requires a commitment to quality in all aspects of the company's operations, and processes should be free from defects (Padhi, 2010). There are eight key elements of total quality management -- ethics, integrity, trust, training, teamwork, leadership, recognition, communication.