Under the Garbage CAN model (German: Garbage pail model) one understands a modelful description of the decision behavior about organizations. With complex decisions pro and cons must be weighed out against each other. Personal and social values play a differently strong role. The Nachvolliehen of some decisions lets doubt whether these was also rationally met. This is the Grunglage for the Garbage CAN - model.
Michael D. Cohen, James G. March and Johan P. Olsen described 1972 the Grabage CAN model for the first time and were adapted 1995 it by John Kingdon.
Cohan, March and Olsen call the university as the first example of the modelful description of the decision behavior as organized anarchy, which is characterized by three points. First of all: Problematic of preferences. The definition of the problem and the goals are unclear. The participants recognize their preferences only during the process. Secondly: Unclear technology. The participants know the organizational regulations and structures of the decision-making processes too little. Thirdly: Fluid participation. The members of the decision-making bodies change and certain topics are repeated discussed. From the interaction of these three factors result situations, which favour certain decisions. For these organization decisions four from each other independent, dynamic rivers are characteristic after Cohen: Problems, solutions, participant, decision opportunities. The term river is to clarify here that these processes are constant in motion. For example solutions for problems can exist still at all did not arise.
After the adaptation of John Kingdon has the model of only three rivers: Problem, Policies, Politics. By Policies strategies are understood for the connection about problems and solutions. The Politics defines the combination of participants and decision opportunities. It can come from psychological perspective to problems. On the one hand decisions are collectively made, however the Teilnehmner of the committees constantly changes. Further the members of the committees have often only their own functional area in the view and to know very few about the overall organisation, since many functional areas communicate hardly with one another. Many decision makers do not have complete decision relevant Information.Es come thus to a decision only if the rivers are briefly to each other compatible. This compatibility succeeds however does not continue to rest contents in the "garbage can".
Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1-25.
meeting OF the Canadian Political Science Association, Winnipeg, Manitoba, June 3-5, 2004.
Contemporary housing Policy. Australian journal OF Public administration, 61, 86-97.33
We found here 6 related websites.
Index | Privacy | Terms Of Use | Sitemap | Feedback