Rational planning and responsiveness: the case of the HSAs.
American government in the twentieth century has been faced with a serious value conflict between the need for rational allocation of scarce resources through planning, and the need to be responsive to a diverse society. Two ideal types of planning correspond to these two values. Rational planning emphasizes the importance of the planner's expertise in achieving the "best" path to socially defined goals. Advocacy planning emphasizes the importance of responsiveness to group interests since all planning decisions are basically a matter of value choice. Citizen participation in planning often combines elements of these two models, embodying the value conflict in planning agency procedures. Health systems agencies are examined as a typical case of such planning. Their failure to build a constituency is viewed as a consequence of role conflict reduction strategies by representatives who did not know whether to play the planner or the advocate role, and how to play either.
D003256:Community Participation; D003220:Conflict, Psychological; D006075:Governing Board; D006307:Health Systems Agencies / Q000458:organization & administration*; D006801:Humans; D012380:Role; D013781:Texas; D014481:United States