Drivers and Challenges to Effective Policy Implementation

Policy implementation has been described as being imperative for the successful delivery of policy outcomes. Across the globe, several instances of policy successes and failures have been attributed to successful or unsuccessful implementation processes. Policy implementation, particularly in developing countries such as Nigeria, has continually posed a challenge to the actual execution of government policies (Obaje, 2009, Lopez-Acevedo et al., 2012, Ibrahim, 2012, Dessy, 2007, Ali, 2006), yet there

29

appears to be an insufficient amount of literature reflecting the nature of interactions which occur within the interorganisational and multi-layered structure of the implementation process. The citizenry has remained the most adversely affected by the absence of proper policy implementation pathways, as evident from the abysmal outcomes emanating from the implementation of policies in the country.

An Economist report on enabling effective implementation, observed the crucial nature of policy implementation within organisations, stating that failed implementation would lead to unsuccessful efforts and also result in regulatory negligence, thus exposing public and private organisations to a host of legal issues (EIU., 2010). The study reported that ineffective implementation of policy posed major constraints to public and private sector organisations alike. Furthermore, certain facts which emerged from the study included the following;

 The fact that poor implementation was prevalent across the globe;

 The increasing demand for the development and adoption of more effective policy implementation processes/methodologies;

 The under-resourced nature of implementation activities by various organisations;

 The reactive posture of organisations towards implementation, rather than a proactive one;

 Often, interests of senior management within these organisations tend to override those of other stakeholders within the implementation system;

 The increasing tendency to view people as constituting hindrances to the implementation process, rather than as solutions;

 A need for a holistic approach to policy implementation.

According to the same report, such holistic approaches are necessary for proper analysis of the implementation process and usually involves;

“... sufficient resources; the capacity to monitor and learn from mistakes; communication with all stakeholders about the nature and purpose of the change; and the ability to include these same stakeholders in the design of the

30

The report identified five separate CSFs for effective implementation, namely: resources; planning and processes; leadership; buy-in (winning support); and finally, technology (EIU., 2010). Contributing, Wanna (2007) added other CSFs, namely; organisational self-awareness; effective governance; support from the top; in-depth understanding of the interaction between policy development and implementation; engagement with other organisations; and continuous monitoring and evaluation. However adhering to these CSFs has not been easy, as a post-mortem conducted by Wanna (2007) and EIU (2010) seem to suggest. According to the former, factors ranging from poor alignment of the project with strategic direction; poor expression of business requirements; and untested benefits case have proven to be the greatest undoing of various implementation processes. Meanwhile, the latter revealed that policy implementation required an integration of execution into a broader continuum which encompasses both policy formulation and feedback. For effective implementation to occur, the study stressed that companies and government entities must also; consider the risks and benefits of such a policy change and apply resources accordingly; integrate implementation considerations into policy planning and decision-making processes; possess a structured manner for reporting on policy implementation successes and failures and the resultant effect of the change; adopt the lessons from this reporting to improve planning the next time round; look into technology where it might be useful and make good use of the same; ensure regular communication between stakeholders to ascertain their needs and impact of the new policy on their needs; have senior management lead the change; and find structured and unstructured ways not only to keep relevant people throughout the organisation informed about the change, but also to use their insight to improve policy formulation and implementation.

In identifying the barriers to effective implementation, O'Toole Jr and Montjoy (1984) stated that most of the issues confronting implementation emanated from the widely- shared characteristics of people and their patterns of organisation. They added that usually, interorganisational problems experienced during implementation are caused, in part, by the lack of attention to and incentives for coordination among organisations. If policies or organisations set up administrative coordinating units specifically to implement such policies, these problems might be reduced. But such organisations might further fragment structure and inhibit the effective implementation process.

31

In his contribution, Ali (2006) attributed the causes of policy failures to poor implementation. Assessing the process of education policy implementation in Pakistan, he observed that apart from conventional causes such as the governance structure defects, over-centralisation, inadequate resources, overt dependence on foreign aid, lack of total commitment and support from the political class and the prevalence of unclear or over ambitious policy targets, problems relating to poor cognition on the part of the implementing stakeholders posed a severe challenge to successful implementation. This view was supported by findings emerging from the work of Nudzor (2012). Nudzor in his study of the implementation process using a Ghanaian educational policy exemplar, observed that teachers and the education authority personnel possessed a varied understanding of what the policy objectives were as well as whom the policies were targeted at. On the other hand, he also observed that the failure of the policy makers to understand the policy implementation process was centred upon the absence of continuous interaction, dialogue, feedback and modification of objectives, coping with mixed feelings, and values and norms.

From a Nigerian perspective, there appears to be a consensus between various authors (Okafor, 2007, Onakuse and Lenihan, 2007, Obaje, 2009, Aminu et al., 2012, Makinde, 2005, Okoroafor and Anuforo, 2012) that corruption, lack of continuity in government policies and inadequate resources are responsible for the prevalent implementation deficit in the country. These factors have held the country back from benefiting from expected policy outcomes as intended during the policy formulation stages. Makinde (2005) listed communication, resources, dispositions or attitudes, and the bureaucratic structure as CSFs for effective implementation of policy in Nigeria. Surprisingly, no study has attempted to carry out a holistic evaluation of the interorganisational structure of the implementation process from a systematic perspective in Nigeria, to date.

Thus it becomes imperative to conceptualise these relationships between various organisations within the implementation process in such a manner that it reflects the positions of various organisations and the extant mode of interdependences within the system. This is necessary as it allows for a proper comprehension of the system. Proctor et al. (2011) in lending their support to the development of such conceptualisations, admitted that the determination of how to conceptualize and measure successful implementation has remained an unresolved issue in the field of implementation research. Whereas this study is not going to attempt to measure successful

32

implementation, it shall concentrate on the evaluation of the implementation process through one of the acclaimed strategies for policy implementation in the contemporary world - public procurement.