Is The “Best Approach” How We Should Be Developing Our Policies?

Feb 28

Have you ever heard decision-makers and experts labelling an approach as “the best approach” when it comes to solutions and problem-solving? People are always looking for the easy decision, the one that is simple to explain and comes with a seamless execution of the proposed solution. In one way, it can make sense from a decision-making and implementation point of view, in another way, it misses the uniqueness of human behaviour and needs that dictates our actions toward issues we are attempting to solve. It may also fall short of the many systematic factors that are social, economical, cultural, and political that impact the needs, choices, and wants of the members in the community.

So, why do we tend to design policies around the perceived “the best approach”? The simple answer is, it is easier to develop policies and procedures if the majority of the public agrees and it aligns with an expert opinion. More people would be likely to follow said policies and procedures which can result in promising and positive impact. It also saves time on decision-making if it is considered to be the “best” option.

If it is considered the “best,” why is that a problem? Well, not everyone fits the majority. We all have different needs, wants, and preferences that shape not only our decisions but our access. If a policy or procedure is narrowly focused on a specific approach, the people that the approach does not work for will be stuck due to the decisions of others.

There are also issues about who is considered an expert or the authority of the problem. There are biases in all aspects of society. Even what is considered our society’s values that is used as a guide for decision-making has its flaws. What we are able to learn, criticize, relearn, and make decisions on is entirely based on what information we are able to access, the voice of authority we consider as important, and whose voice can be heard the loudest to the authority that makes the decisions that matter to us.

Since most decisions are based on the majority, many made-marginalized groups that do not have the numbers to reach a majority that are crucial to decision-making circles. So, they do not always have their voices heard on specific approaches, nor are testing commonly in the approaches to ensure that it will work. In some ways, we have to rethink how decisions should be made and whether focusing on one framework, one approach on an issue is really the “best” idea.

It may be easier for decision-makers, especially considering how slow their bureaucratic process can be. However, the different ways such as just getting started and adapting as you go or designing practices, procedures, and policies with everyone in mind from the start can be useful depending on the needs of the community. While we put a lot of focus on decision-makers such as politicians, it is important to remember that decisions can happen at all levels that affect a person’s experience. Evaluating in all levels and areas of the expertise, training, and interpretation of higher level documents is critical to ensuring two things. First, that policies can be translated into action and two, concerns and issues can be brought back up the chain to improve the process.