What Is The Process Used To Develop Or Update Policy
Firstwhat Is The Process Used To Develop Or Update Policymr Knaack R
First what is the process used to develop or update policy? Mr. Knaack explained that policy development involves the mayor proposing ideas, consulting with administration and legal counsel, and then presenting proposals to the city council for approval. Once approved, the policy becomes official. Constituents participate by electing officials and providing input during public hearings or comment periods on key issues like city improvements, public safety, or housing. Policies are typically reviewed and updated in response to specific needs, such as safety concerns or efficiency, but general policies are reviewed periodically, often annually, or when issues arise. Unique policies are those that are formally approved by the city council and must be followed by all members, including the mayor. The adequacy of policies can be impacted by organizational leadership quality, emphasizing the importance of voting for effective representatives.
In contrast, a second organization, Noah’s Ark, develops policies based on guidelines from the Minnesota Department of Human Services and the Minnesota Department of Health. The owner, director, and two staff members collaborate to create and update policies, providing input to staff and ensuring compliance with state standards. Policy review occurs annually or as needed, particularly after incidents or surveys, and includes evaluations by state agencies and accrediting bodies like NAEYC. The organization’s policies are uniquely characterized by adherence to state guidelines, despite being a small, family-run business with direct communication between owner and director. A noted gap is the desire for more frequent staff policy reviews to enhance adherence and understanding.
Paper For Above instruction
The process of policy development and update within organizations varies significantly depending on the organizational structure, leadership style, and regulatory environment. Examining two distinct entities—one a municipal government led by elected officials and another a private child development center—reveals both similarities and differences in their approaches to policy formation, involvement of constituents or stakeholders, evaluation routines, and the unique aspects of their policies.
In the case of the city government, policy creation begins with the mayor proposing ideas, which are then discussed internally with the administration and legal team before being forwarded to the city council for approval. This multi-step process underscores the importance of checks and balances, ensuring policies align with legal standards and community interests. Public participation is crucial; constituents influence policy by voting for representatives and providing input during public hearings or comment periods, particularly on substantial issues affecting community wellbeing. The city’s policies are reviewed periodically—sometimes annually, or when specific issues arise, such as safety improvements or cost adjustments. The review process is responsive rather than routine, driven by emergent needs rather than a fixed schedule.
What makes the city’s policies particularly noteworthy is their formal approval process, which mandates compliance by all actors within the organization, including the mayor. Policies govern multiple departments—police, fire, street cleaning, water services—each with its tailored procedures but unified under overarching city regulations. The effectiveness of these policies hinges significantly on leadership quality: competent leadership can enhance policy relevance, whereas ineffective leadership risks leaving policies outdated or misaligned with citizen needs.
By contrast, Noah’s Ark, a small private child care organization, follows a policy development process closely aligned with state guidelines from the Minnesota Department of Human Services and the Department of Health. Here, policy creation is a collaborative effort among the owner, the director, and staff—lacking a formal board of directors—who work collectively to interpret and apply these regulations. The organization actively involves stakeholders, most notably parents who provide feedback through biannual surveys, influencing policy reforms. Regular evaluation occurs through annual or incident-triggered reviews, supplemented by external assessments from state agencies and accreditation bodies such as NAEYC. These reviews serve to maintain compliance, improve quality, and reinforce best practices.
One distinctive feature of Noah’s Ark’s policies is their strong reliance on state standards, which act as a backbone for operational procedures. The organization’s family-oriented, private nature fosters direct communication between the owner and the director, facilitating swift updates and adherence to regulations. However, a noted weakness is the infrequent review of staff policies—only once or twice annually—leading to potential gaps in staff understanding and compliance. The desire for more frequent training and policy refreshers highlights the importance of ongoing staff development in maintaining high-quality organizational standards.
Despite differences, both organizations demonstrate a fundamental necessity for structured policy development and review: in public organizations, democratic participation and legal adherence shape policy content, while in private organizations, external standards and internal collaboration define policy boundaries. Both models recognize the importance of evaluation, whether reactive (addressing issues) or proactive (scheduled reviews), to ensure policies remain relevant and effective. The role of leadership emerges as vital across contexts; strong, ethical leaders influence not only the formulation of policies but also their implementation and ongoing refinement.
In reflecting on these processes, it becomes evident that effective leadership is pivotal to sustained organizational success. Leaders must balance adherence to external guidelines with internal stakeholder input, promoting transparency and continuous improvement. As I develop my leadership skills, understanding these diverse policy frameworks reinforces the importance of clear communication, stakeholder engagement, and agile adaptation to change. Emphasizing periodic review and staying informed of regulatory updates are strategies I intend to incorporate into my practice as an educational leader. Furthermore, fostering a culture of open dialogue and training ensures that policies are not static documents but living tools that guide ethical and effective decision-making.
In conclusion, the comparative analysis of these organizations’ policy development processes highlights that while structures and protocols may differ, the core principles of stakeholder involvement, regular review, and leadership influence are universal. Cultivating these elements as foundational components of leadership will enhance my capacity to lead organizations that are compliant, responsive, and continuously evolving to meet the needs of their communities or clients.
References
1. Denhardt, R. B., & Denhardt, J. V. (2015). The New Public Service: Serving, Not Steering. Routledge.
2. Kettl, D. F. (2015). The Transformation of Governance: Public Administration for the Twenty-First Century. Johns Hopkins University Press.
3. Linder, C., & Peters, G. (2015). Policy Networks and Policy Analysis. In The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy.
4. Moore, M. H. (2013). Recognizing Public Value. Harvard University Press.
5. Public Policy Institute of California. (2018). Policy Development Process.
6. Minnesota Department of Human Services. (2021). Child Care Center Licensing and Regulations.
7. Minnesota Department of Health. (2020). Child Care Licensing Program.
8. National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2019). Accreditation Standards.
9. Rothstein, H., & Huber, M. (2015). Public Governance and Policy Evaluation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management.
10. Wildavsky, A. (1984). Implementation. University of California Press.