Utilizing The Delphi Technique In Policy Discussion: A Case Study Of A Privatized Utility In Britain
| Date | 01 September 1998 |
| Author | Bryan Gladstone,Chas Critcher |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00110 |
| Published date | 01 September 1998 |
UTILIZING THE DELPHI TECHNIQUE IN
POLICY DISCUSSION: A CASE STUDY OF A
PRIVATIZED UTILITY IN BRITAIN
CHAS CRITCHER AND BRYAN GLADSTONE
A challenge for social policy makers is to explore consensus and dissensus in issues
where approaches such as roundtable meetings and focus groups are not feasible
or likely to provide accurate information. The Delphi survey technique is a powerful
tool for exploring social policy issues not as widely used as it deserves. This article
explores Delphi and describes its application to a major and highly contentious
public policy issue; how the electricity supply industry should respond to customers
in debt. Our experience demonstrates how expertise and opinions of individuals
who either would not or could not normally cooperate can be brought together to
achieve a consensus, resulting in policy changes that lead to measurable social wel-
fare gains. It illustrates Delphi’s strength as a policy tool that recognizes the multi-
plicity of interests involved in such issues, the value of different kinds of front-line
expertise and the desirability of proceeding on the basis of a consensus of infor-
med opinion.
INTRODUCTION
Delphi technique has been used as a tool of applied social science, primarily
for planning or forecasting (Mitchell 1992, p. 5), but knowledge of it is not
widespread. In their seminal work on Delphi, Harold A. Linstone and Mur-
ray Turoff lament that many Delphi studies used for in-house or con-
sultancy purposes do not get written up in publicly available form (1975,
p. 78). This article reports on one such use of Delphi survey technique on
a key social policy issue in Great Britain – the responses of electricity supply
companies to consumers who fail to pay their bills. Our purpose is to
explain the technique and to suggest how it might be used more widely to
assist social policy decision makers.
The project, which was commissioned by the Electricity Consumers’
Committees’ Chairmen’s Group (ECCCG), addressed an issue of key con-
cern about which there was no apparent consensus. It was known that inter-
ested parties had widely differing views on the appropriateness of policies
and the desirability or viability of alternatives. Though suppliers operate
Chas Critcher is Professor in the School of Cultural Studies and Bryan Gladstone is Senior Lecturer
in the Sheffield Business School at Sheffield Hallam University.
Public Administration Vol. 76 Autumn 1998 (431–449)
Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1998, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 IJF, UK and 350 Main Street,
Malden, MA 02148, USA.
432 CHAS CRITCHER AND BRYAN GLADSTONE
on a regional basis, the issue was a national one, so an additional consider-
ation was the need to consult geographically dispersed experts.
It is in such difficult situations that conventional approaches tend to
break down. Delphi offers a means whereby a rational review of a social
issue may emerge. It enables the areas and extent of agreement and dis-
agreement to be identified in a way that is often not possible by other
means.
The exact nature of Delphi is not well understood by social policy prac-
titioners, so we take care to explain the development and mechanics of the
Delphi technique before describing the ECCCG project and drawing out
some implications for future applications of Delphi.
Delphi technique
Delphi was first used by the Rand Corporation in the 1950s to help the
United States Air Force identify the Soviet view of the bomb capacity
required to destroy strategic US targets (Linstone and Turoff 1975, p. 1).
Rand developed Delphi to forecast trends in science and technology and
their impacts upon society. It was subsequently developed to enhance com-
munication amongst geographically disparate groups of experts. Linstone
and Turoff define the Delphi technique as ‘a method for structuring a group
communication process so that the process is effective in allowing a group
of individuals, as a whole, to deal with a complex problem’ (1975, p. 3).
Delphi is a method of trawling opinion amongst experts via a series of
written questionnaires. Specific propositions are presented to participants
for individual rating on a number of criteria. Results are collated and fed
back to participants so they can reconsider their judgements in the light of
the spread of opinion. Propositions may be reformulated in view of com-
ments on the first round and new propositions added. The number of
rounds may be as few as two and as many as five. Intended outcomes may
include any or all of the following: identifying the degree of consensus
or dissensus, specifying the range of different positions, and revealing the
rationales which lie behind the judgements.
The Delphi technique is especially beneficial when, ‘The problem does
not lend itself to precise analytical techniques but can benefit from subjec-
tive judgements on a collective basis’ (1975, p. 4). It is even more appropri-
ate when it is not practicable or desirable to bring experts together. Such
considerations may arise for logistical reasons, where experts do not oper-
ate on the same networks or could be physically brought together only
at inordinate expense. Alternatively, they may arise because a face-to-face
meeting could prove counter-productive if the experts belong to interest
groups which engage in conflict or where dominant personalities could
determine the outcome. By contrast, Delphi brings together a wide range of
experts from different backgrounds, enables disagreement in a constructive
forum and ensures equal participation by participants. It need not require
Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1998
To continue reading
Request your trial