Preface

One of the basic assumptions of the rationalist school is that decisions precede an action, a belief that has entered popular folklore in the exhortation: "look before you leap." This is, of course, good counsel. But suppose you don't know how to leap? The inability to leap or, more generally, the ability or inability to implement a decision is rarely taken into account in the process of decision analysis.

-John Freidmann and Barclay Hudson, Knowledge and Action: A Guide to Planning Theory

GENERAL APPROACH TO THE BOOK

"Program planning" is a construct that can make complex situations more manageable. In a world in which change is a constant, program planning approaches that provide an illusion of being in control may be comforting. In fact, the certitude of knowing how to plan something from beginning to end is a desired skill set for those who want to "look before they leap." This certitude is designed by professionals who want to demonstrate that they have something to offer and who might want to be hired as a program coordinator, grants writer, or manager. Many a professional has carried a copy of a plan or grant proposal with them to a job interview to demonstrate their ability to design a program.

Based on our understanding of students' aspirations and needs, for years we taught program planning with the assurance that if a goal could be established, and if measurable objectives could be articulated, then somehow or some way their program designs could be implemented in a reasonable manner. Yet many programs that looked doable on paper were anything but doable in real life. Even though our graduates' facility with "logic models" wowed employers and even potential funders, when it came to implementation many were often surprised to find that program designs did not always unfold in the envisioned manner. In fact, we learned in this process that excellent, precise, evidence-based designs could win accolades from professionals and funders, but that the process of enacting plans revealed unexpected gaps and barriers for staff tasked with implementation. Ironically, while some funded programs were not always creatively designed for addressing complex situations that needed alternative approaches, staff of community-based programs that appeared to work could not always articulate why and how their programs did work. They could not discuss their planning experiences in terms that could be grasped by exacting professional audiences. Our challenge, then, became to prepare our students to think and talk in the established language of program planning, as well as offer them alternative ways of planning, thinking, talking, and surviving. They needed to be facile at entering the established world of program planning while also knowing when to use different approaches. Most of all, they needed to recognize that there was no one best way to plan. With this came a necessity to accurately assess the situation for which they were planning and, from that, determine the appropriate approach for the circumstances at hand. To accomplish this, we had the stimulating challenge of determining how to impart the needed knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Our students have told us that we have been able to meet the challenge.

Therefore, we decided to write this book with the purpose of comparing and contrasting different ways of program planning. We do so out of a belief that there are multiple ways of knowing, and that there are multiple ways of planning and doing. Because these ways are different does not make one superior to others, and we have found that recognizing that there are differences can be freeing. It allows the purpose of the planning process to drive the methods used, rather than the methods driving the design. This goes a long way toward facilitating professional program planners in acquiring resources for planning and having increased flexibility for functioning in varying social, economic, and cultural settings.

Our book is geared to future program planners in master's programs in social work, public administration, nonprofit management, public health, community psychology, applied sociology, human services, and related fields. It may also be useful in required senior-level courses on large systems change offered in baccalaureate programs. In social work, community psychology, applied sociology, and human services programs, where many students expect to perform "direct service work," it can increase understanding of direct service programs. Courses in program planning, macro social work practice, program evaluation, organization practice, policy implementation, and related subjects will benefit from using this book for creating expanded applications of program planning strategies, tactics, and skills.

Reasons for all practitioners to become familiar with the skills offered in this book will be central in the pages that follow. All practitioners both impact and are impacted by programming at some stage in their direct service delivery work. They are also sometimes alienated by the language and techniques of traditional planning, thinking that planning has nothing to do with their efforts in relationship building and problem-solving with their clients. We believe that an alternative, nonlinear approach to planning that takes into account intuition and serendipity and creatively capitalizes on complex circumstances is sure to make sense to many students who are turned off by more traditional, prescriptive planning approaches.

We are aware that some people prefer to have a greater sense of order, and that they believe there is a preferred way to plan a program, through precise, linear thought. For these planners, linear reasoning is a priority. This book is designed to show that nonlinear (sometimes called nonrational or circular) thinking is not only useful in reasoning, but that it supports an alternative type of interpretive planning called an emergent approach.

Interpretive planning translates different ways of knowing and understanding into the "doing" aspects of planning human service programs. Linear planning models can be compared with alternative, nonlinear approaches, and it is possible to assess the costs and benefits of each approach. Ideas about when differing approaches are used most effectively are offered here as a guide for program planners faced with situations that do not always resemble the clean, clear opportunities for which rational, prescriptive planning is usually discussed. Ways to systematically approach messy situations (e.g., when you are called on to begin to plan in the middle, not at the beginning, of a project; or when you are asked to help in situations in nontraditional or non-Western cultures with differing approaches to logic) will be addressed while applying reasonable ways of assuring and accounting for quality in human service programming, regardless of the context. Our emphasis is on planning and design, with implementation and evaluation of the results of planning also recognized. This is a flexible conceptualization of the planning process that can be useful regardless of the culture, mission, or goals of the human service setting or organization within which planning occurs. Through different approaches, alternate ways of knowing are introduced into planning processes, facilitating programs targeted to meet needs in traditional or alternative contexts.

ORGANIZATION OF THE BOOK

The book is composed of six chapters, successively building both understanding and competence for good program planning. End-of-chapter discussion questions and exercises focus on skills development derived from material in each chapter. Practical application of planning concepts is made through real-life case examples intended to be of help in thinking about the issues and the way they are presented, and to assist those not yet engaged with the challenges and opportunities of complex problem-solving in program planning. A glossary is offered to aid thinking along the way and to clarify our use of terms.

Conceptually, we examine two types of planning based on different worldviews: rational and interpretive. These worldviews are joined by two approaches to planning: rational planning, which is tied to what we are calling prescriptive approaches; and interpretive planning, which is connected to what we are calling emergent approaches. Throughout the book we refer to problem-solving as a process that can be undertaken through prescriptive approaches, in which a goal is predetermined, or through emergent approaches, in which plans unfold in an unpredictable manner. We have carefully chosen our terms, in hopes that they will provide the reader with viable conceptual frameworks and languages in which to communicate about program planning.

In Chapter 1, we introduce the possibility that the need identification for a social program intervention may come from choices raised by different ways of conceptualizing an opportunity or problem, that there are choices in program design. Some of these choices are strongly cognitive, but others have affective and power dimensions. Through an exploration of the difference between a line and a circle, Chapter 2 also seeks an evenhanded understanding of the differences in these choices and the processes by which programs are designed and planned. This subsequently takes us into how to know and understand differences between induction and deduction and positivist/rational and interpretivist ways of knowing. We think aspects of rational and nonrational thought...