Motivation and Perspective Impact Interests

Before even deciding which policy to tackle and begin the process of developing a policy brief, it is essential to determine whether this issue aligns with your interest. For example, both Jannson and Stone make similar points about how one’s motivation, attitude, and perspective impact the assessment of whether pursuing this issue is in their interest.

At the same time there is a contradiction between Jannson and Stone regarding how representatives do not reflect their constituents concerns in their own words (Stone, 2012). Stone states that those elected officials do not follow through with their promises they made during the election process. This is true because candidates typically want to address and focus on what they believe the public’s interest are. However, when it comes to delivering on those promises they may or may not keep their word. Stone believes that the candidates deceive their constituents only to ensure their seat in office. Jannson explains that public officials will follow through in addressing a problem when it is in their best interest. For instance, when affluent individuals complained about the homeless problem around their stores, which affected their business, public officials acted to address this problem. The decision to act is based on “elected officials are influenced by wealthy contributors to their campaigns and are tempted by the prospect of private development that would generate more taxes to provide increased services for everyone” (Jannson, 2017).

So, it may be in the best interest of affluent individuals, and to address this issue (following the democratic theory) would be regarded as morally equal but can also be politically unequal (Stone, 2012). The homeless problem is affecting business owners lively hood, but by fixing one objective condition can be problematic because it has multiple effects. By fixing one problem they are creating another by displacing homeless individuals who have no control over the limited services resulting to their being homeless.

It is apparent that is it difficult to determine which issue will be addressed. Either you decide to pursue a problem that aligns with your interest or aligns with the public’s interest. Nevertheless, that is why there is a framework in place to ensure fairness when developing a policy brief. The way I interpreted the steps Jannson presented to develop a policy brief such as identifying which agency will receive funds, the sources of funding, the amount of money and funding channels etc. is related to Stone’s rationality under freedom (Stone, 2012 & Jannson, 2017). In order to fulfill the objective interest, policy makers or advocates should have all possible alternatives to be free to choose. For example, stakeholders and policy advocates, who are deciding what the policy brief should entail, need to be sure they are given all possible alternatives to choose the best collective interest. Reviewing each possible funding source or agency that is in most need of these funds, allows policy makers to identify each objective outcome in order to make the best decision that aligns for the whole.

Jansson, B. (2017). Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy practice to social justice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Stone, D. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision-making (3rd ed.). New York, NY: W.W.Norton & Company

Related posts:

All you have to do is buy a trustpilot review for your business and we’re here to offer the best possible deal. Buying trustpilot reviews will be the best decision for any business owner as consumers…

A simple answer to why many of us fall victim to the same mistakes.

To own an up-and-running business is no joke. It is quite important for you to take every bit of your business crucial and very important. Every part of your business needs you, your attention, your…