Policy Windows: What They Are And When They Occur

There are parallels between how policies change and how decision processes change. These parallels are easier to understand if decision processes are seen as policies developed by groups who use them, within one or across networked organizations. In this view, policy makers in public policy correspond to those managers in organizations who have the authority to change decision processes, and the public in public policy corresponds to stakeholders who participate and observe the consequences of the decision process. 

To see a decision process as an organizational policy makes it possible to discuss how such policies might change by analogy to how public policies have been observed to change. It helps understand factors that lead to policy change, how that change may unfold, the roles involved, among others. 

This text is about so-called policy windows, situations in which three streams of activity – the problem, policy, and politics streams – align to create an opportunity for policy change. The text discusses what these streams may be when decision processes are considered as policies, and why this is useful when you are tasked with developing and improving a decision process.

This text is part of the series on the design of decision governance. Decision Governance refers to values, principles, practices designed to improve the quality of decisions. Find all texts on decision governance here, including “What is Decision Governance?” here.

The Multiple Streams Framework in Research on Public Policy 

The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF), introduced by John Kingdon in the context of public policy, describes how issues gain attention and lead to decision making. MSF identifies three independent streams: the problem stream, the policy stream, and the politics stream. These streams operate independently but converge during windows of opportunity, facilitating the adoption of policy solutions.

• Problem Stream: Issues that capture the attention of policymakers, often highlighted by indicators, crises, or feedback mechanisms. Factors such as media coverage, lobbying efforts, and public pressure play critical roles in determining which issues gain attention. Media coverage can amplify certain problems, framing them as urgent or widespread, while lobbying ensures specific interests are represented. Public pressure, often through protests or petitions, can compel policymakers to prioritize issues that resonate with the broader population.
• Policy Stream: A domain where policy solutions are generated, debated, and refined by experts, researchers, and advocates. The quality of policy solutions is influenced by several factors, including the rigor of research underpinning the solutions, the diversity of expertise involved in their development, and the alignment of proposed solutions with the values and objectives of key stakeholders. Additionally, institutional capacity for implementation and the anticipated political and economic feasibility of solutions play significant roles. Solutions are more likely to gain traction if they are adaptable to changing contexts and are supported by credible evidence and persuasive advocacy.
• Politics Stream: The environment shaped by political events, such as changes in administration, public opinion, or lobbying efforts. Types of events that influence this stream include elections, shifts in public sentiment, significant legislative actions, and lobbying campaigns. Elections can introduce new priorities or alter the balance of power, thereby reshaping policy agendas. Public opinion, often swayed by crises or media coverage, can pressure policymakers to act on specific issues. Legislative actions, such as the passage or failure of key bills, can open or close policy windows. Lobbying efforts by interest groups can also amplify particular problems or solutions, influencing their prominence within the problem and policy streams.

A policy window emerges when these streams align, enabling decision makers to act. MSF emphasizes timing and the role of “policy entrepreneurs” who advocate for specific solutions when opportunities arise.

An Example: An Unstructured Decision Process For Capital Investments 

Let’s assume an organization has an unstructured process for selecting new services to offer to customers. Unstructured decision processes often lack clear guidelines, transparency, and consistency. These processes typically involve ad hoc problem identification, poorly defined roles, and decisions based on intuition rather than evidence. As a result, organizations face several challenges:

• Inefficient Resource Allocation: Without structured evaluation, new services may not align with strategic objectives.
• Delayed Decision Making: The absence of clear roles and responsibilities can lead to bottlenecks.
• Limited Stakeholder Buy-In: Decisions perceived as arbitrary may face resistance from employees, customers, or other stakeholders.
• Missed Opportunities: Unclear processes hinder the ability to act swiftly during critical decision windows.

For example, a telecommunications company relying on an unstructured approach might approve new service offerings without analyzing customer demand, market competition, or financial feasibility, leading to wasted resources and missed opportunities to meet stakeholder needs.

Using The Multiple Streams Framework To Explain Change Of The Service Selection Process

Below is one way of reading MSF for the example of an organization that needs to change the decision process it uses to select telecommunications services it offers.

• Problem Stream: The transition from unstructured to structured processes often begins with recognizing current inefficiencies. Key indicators, such as declining market share or customer dissatisfaction, highlight the need for change. Delayed decision making, limited stakeholder buy-in, missed opportunities are all signals that the current decision process is no longer suitable. For example, a telecommunications company might identify declining subscription rates and wrongly associate them with the lack of innovative service offerings, while the issue may be new technology which draws customers away from its, and its historical competitors’ offerings.
• Solution Stream: If decision process stakeholders have recognized issues with the current decision process, it is likely that they have ideas about how to change it. They may want to add new sources of information about customer behavior and competitors, technological, economic, and societal trends which may be impacting customer behavior related to telecommunication service use, and so on. They may want to engage additional stakeholders in data collection, ensure pilot services can be rapidly developed and tested, and so on.
• Organizational Dynamics Stream: Organizational culture and leadership play pivotal roles in driving a change. Leaders may recognize that stakeholders see the need for change, and have solutions to offer. They may see benefits for themselves, as their competence will be assessed better if they enable the changes which will lead to better decisions.

Leading Indicators of Policy Windows

The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) offers guidance on recognizing indicators that a policy window might open. These indicators are often specific to the convergence of the problem, solution, and organizational dynamics streams.

1. Problem Stream Indicators:
   • Crisis or Urgent Issues: A sudden decline in key performance metrics or a significant external event (e.g., customer dissatisfaction spikes or competitor actions) signals urgency.
   • Stakeholder Feedback: Consistent feedback highlighting gaps or inefficiencies can indicate readiness for action.
2. Solution Stream Indicators:
   • Mature and Feasible Options: When viable solutions have been well-developed, thoroughly vetted, and are ready for implementation, it suggests a window may open.
   • Alignment with Strategic Goals: Solutions that align with long-term organizational objectives are more likely to gain traction when the opportunity arises.
3. Organizational Dynamics Indicators:
   • Leadership Changes: New leaders often bring fresh priorities and willingness to capitalize on opportunities.
   • Cultural Shifts: A shift toward data-driven or customer-centric approaches increases the likelihood of aligning streams.
   • Advocacy or Pressure from Influential Stakeholders: Internal or external stakeholders championing an idea can accelerate convergence.
4. External Context:
   • Market Dynamics: Changes in customer needs, technological advances, or regulatory shifts can create conditions for action.
   • Competitor Activity: Aggressive moves by competitors often compel organizations to act decisively.

Understanding and monitoring these indicators allows organizations to anticipate and prepare for policy windows. In the context of deiison process change, and more broadly, decision governance change, the same indicators can help identify, as well as create opportunities for major decision governance changes.

References

Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Little, Brown.