The Four Things You Need to Know
| Published date | 01 July 2007 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0952076707078767 |
| Author | Barry Quirk |
| Date | 01 July 2007 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
© Public Policy and Administration
SAGE Publications Ltd
Los Angeles, London, New Delhi
and Singapore
0952-0767
200707 22(3) 367–373
The Four Things You Need to
Know
Barry Quirk
Lewisham Council, UK
Abstract
The best approach to appreciating the complex issues involved in public
policy is to eschew single domains of specialist knowledge and instead apply
three general principles of understanding. First, by establishing links between
apparently unconnected specialisms; second, by adopting a conjectural
approach of trial and error; and third, by framing policy questions in terms of
risk and uncertainty. Finally, for those with leadership responsibilities of
public institutions, a fourth factor needs to be recognized. In organizational
life, political and managerial leaders need to realize that people are principally
motivated to do well intrinsically and not mainly through external incentives.
Keywords
knowledge, motivation, public policy, risk
In Sartre’s novel Nausea, the central character, Antoine Roquentin recounts the
activity of Ogier, a bailiff’s clerk. Ogier has spent seven years in a library. He is
able to discuss Kant but not Plato. The reason for his partial knowledge is because
he is teaching himself by reading through a library of books from A to Z and after
seven years he has only got to L. Ogier’s approach to knowledge is linear, cumu-
lative and serial. In my view this approach to accumulating knowledge mirrors the
presumptions of many public service managers or politicians. When they take
managerial or political responsibility for a new service they, quite understandably,
race to understand its essence, its truths, its rhythms. They want to ‘know’ the
issues inside out. They focus on a new letter in the alphabet – a new shelf of books.
Imagine that you have no background in, say, public transport management and
planning, in the imprisoning and rehabilitation of criminal offenders or in the
educational psychology of children with special needs. And yet also imagine that
you have been elected or appointed to make judgements about the strategic
DOI: 10.1177/0952076707078767
Barry Quirk, London Borough of Lewisham, Town Hall, Catford, London SE6 4RU, UK.
[email: Barry.Quirk@lewisham.gov.uk]
367
Public Policy and Administration 22(3)
direction of these critical services. What if you have to decide whether the budget
of one should be lower at the expense of the budget of the other? What if the
organization had low morale and needed improving? You would seek out those
with credibility, experience and knowledge in these two areas; immerse yourself
in the issues, the prevailing concepts and available evidence in each domain;
identify the key problems that need tackling and search out the most trusted solu-
tions to these problems. You would try to discover data about comparative service
performance and relative service outcomes. But you would also know that, after
even a few weeks of effort, your knowledge would still be thin, superficial and
partial. What do you do?
In the private or third sectors this problem is partly solved for organizational
leaders by established organizational economics. Put simply, these sectors are
‘mission driven’ – they therefore achieve success through focus and specializa-
tion. This means that those at the helm of these organizations are immersed in the
services or products of that organization and its purposes. Of course very many
organizations in these sectors undertake a wide range of activities, but even the
most conglomerate private sector organization does not have the array of functions
and responsibilities of, say, a unitary metropolitan Council. And few operate in a
similar goldfish bowl of accountability to that of a major Department of State.
Those senior public managers and politicians at the helm of large multi-purpose
public...
To continue reading
Request your trial