“Models and Structuring” Please respond to the following:
Review Question 6 and select one of the ill-structured problems taken from the journal Policy Analysis (now the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management Under the title “Department of Unintended Consequences”. Analyze the problem; then, provide an example on how classification analysis, hierarchy analysis, and synectics might be used to structure the problem you selected. Identify the problem you selected in your discussion with one of the following key phrases: (a) Egyptian agriculture, (b) ecologists and field mice, (c) San Francisco’s North Beach parking.
When examining the San Francisco North Beach parking situation, I believe that classification analysis, hierarchy analysis, and synectics could all improve the structure, understanding, and the addressing of the situation. For example, classification analysis allows us to logically classify the problem in the San Francisco North Beach parking and break the problem down further into logical divisions. The situation could also be broken down in a hierarchy analysis. Hierarchy analysis helps us identify three types of possible causes: possible, plausible, and actionable. Lastly, the San Francisco North Beach parking situation can be examined through synectics. Synectics allows us to recognize analogous problems. These similarities are critical in policy making as people often frequently fail to recognize that what appears to be a new problem is really an old one.
From the case study, Case 3.1, analyze the problem; then, provide two key differences in data collection represented by the process of group interviewing and content analysis. Take a position on which data collection method is better. Provide at least two reasons for your position.
Two key differences between group interview and content analysis is the openness of discussion within the group interview and the restrictiveness of information and insight within content analysis. I believe group interview to be the better data collection method as it is able to capture both the objective and subjective side of data as illustrated in the case study. This makes this data collection method more comprehensive while not as restrictive or limited to information/content within a form or survey.