OBSTACLES TO STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION IN A NATIONALIZED INDUSTRY[1]

Implementation of policy or strategy in the public sector has attracted a growing interest in the U.S.A. (Bardach, 1977; Derthick, 1972; Pressman and Wildavsky, 1973) and more recently in the U.K. (Dunsire, 1978; Levitt, 1980; S.S.R.C., 1979). the emphasis in this stream of work is on centre-periphery relationships and their respective uses of power and authority and on interorganizational relationships. This emphasis probably stems from the overt independence of local Government and some other public bodies from central Government in their appointment, composition, manner of carrying out their duties and, in resource terms, raising revenue. In large ‘commercial’ organizations, centre-periphery relations have tended to be viewed more in terms of the formal organizational structure and have attracted less research attention. A complementary but distinct stream of research, offering many parallels and useful insights into management science/O.R. implementation, has grown from the early work of Churchman and Scheinblatt (1965) - for example Schultz and Slevin (1975), Doktor et al. (1979). This second stream concentrates more on technical, operational aspects and largely ignores power relations which are assumed to correspond closely to the formal organization structure. A third stream of research has emerged from the strategic management literature (Ansoff, 1979; Anthony, 1965; Lewin, 1981; Steiner and Miner, 1977). Here the emphasis has been on budgeting and control though the scope has broadened to embrace e.g. considerations of power. A fourth related contributor, drawn on mainly by the policy and strategy streams and largely ignored in the public policy literature, is the organizational behaviour literature with its work on the exercise of power in organizations (for example, Cyert and March, 1963; Mumford and Pettigrew, 1975). In the study to be described here, which predates privatization, insights have been drawn from, and relationships established between, each of these streams of work, none of which has yet produced a comprehensive theory of implementation; regretably it remains beyond the scope of this study to do so. Hypotheses have emerged from the study which are offered as a contribution to theory buiding in implementation. It is hoped that they, in combination with findings from other research, will bring nearer the goal of a comprehensive theory of implementation as a guide to planning and action applicable to both the public and private sectors. While there have been some empirical studies of strategy formulation, little field research has been undertaken on implementation (Bardach, 1977; Hofer, 1976; Schultz and Slevin, 1975).