Analyze Issues : L3

Essence of the Work 

To conceive and analyse the underlying factors in a problematic situation within the institution so as to suggest paths to resolution.

Analyses deal with topical issues to reveal key factors surrounding, underlying or generating the failing or deficiency. Determining these critical issues requires a comprehensive knowledgeable analysis of the way the institution works in relation to a particular concern.

Without a systematic grasp of the situation, it is difficult to be confident about appropriate changes. Knee-jerk reactions to supply more money or to change a regulation, as advocated in L2-discussion, can easily end up wasting resources or making matters worse.

Any account must consider, among other things, the parties involved, diversity of views, how entities interact, what the incentives are, how regulation operates, dynamics of innovations, resourcing, and the quality and quantity of demands for services. This enables a view of what is most important in relation to specific complaints.

Example:Legal Values  

In a legal institution, values like fairness, documentation, access, affordability, confidentiality, truthfulness, responsibility, education, procedural justice, public confidence, efficiency, easy access, judicial independence could all be relevant when there are public complaints and noisy protests, for example, about discrimination against a minority group.

Work here involves writing a lengthy report or producing a lengthy documentary or book, which should include or directly imply recommendations for change.

An effective presentation may suggest action by organisations and government. the institution, but expectations need to be limited. When vested interests dislike the outcome, they are likely to mobilize arguments to counteract proposals and may even discredit the author. Analyses can however be used to shape the political agenda.

Example:Henry Tax Review

Many think Australia's economy needs tax reform because it fails on key criteria like supporting economic growth, fairness for younger people, and generating sufficient revenue for services the public desire. The Rudd Government commissioned a review in 2008 led by Ken Henry as Secretary of the Treasury. The Report , published in 2010, was to guide reforms over the following 10-20 years. There were 138 recommendations. Only 3 were implemented, one of which was believed to contribute to the losing the next election. Over 12 years later, nothing has changed and Ken Henry continues to campaign.

Who Does the Work

Whoever conducts the investigation is expected to penetrate deeply and critically into the issue with and emphasis on detail, accuracy, and validity.

An on-going involvement with the institution is necessary to identify the core issues and to put these into context. This is possible for journalists, top bureaucrats, academics and for self-funded in-group experts, often retired from the institution.

Journalists in media firms are labelled with institutional names e.g. "arts editor", "finance editor", "political editor", "education editor". These staff become part of the in-group and have many contacts within those employed more directly. They follow the institution on a daily basis and the longer they report, the more knowledgeable they become. If supported by the editor and backed by the owner, the more capable journalists can do investigative work.

Experts from the in-group who have a reflective capacity and a preoccupation with serving social needs get disturbed when institutional problems become prominent. They are likely to write readable book-length accounts of the current crisis targeted at the non-specialist public. When this happens, they may support the book with opinion pieces in the press, or appear on talk-shows and at conferences to expound the critical issues to be faced.

Senior Bureaucrats in the relevant government department or heading a QUANGO (e.g. Productivity Commission) have a deep immersion in the institution. An investigative body (often called an inquiry or commission) may be set up with several noted experts on the panel to oversee the review.

Social Science Academics in recent times have become more theme-based, specializing in practical issues facing their society rather than engaged in more abstract disciplinary studies. As a result, many inquire and publish solely on some aspect of an institution. Some work within reform-generating organisations.

Because any in-depth investigation touches on social values and may affect the interests of powerful groups, it requires to be sanctioned by an appropriate body. This might be a media organisation or a charity in the sector or an NGO or government department.

Plotting the Work

Analysing issues to produce sensible proposals demands detailed knowledge of the institution. This places the work in the upper half of the Y axis. However, it is not placed at the extreme because any effort here is narrowly circumscribed to a particular aspect of the institution.

Any in-depth investigation necessarily goes into areas that are poorly understood or even unknown to the general public. So concern for consensus cannot loom large and the work is located in the lower half of the X axis. However, it is not at the extreme, because the goal of the work is to tap into widespread concerns and to activate at least some popular support for recommendations.

Topical analyses are therefore in the lower right portion of the upper left quadrant as shown in the diagram—which is the predicted position for t3.

---

In-depth investigations provide a great deal of knowledge, often controversial, and such complexity is impossible for the public to assimilate. Something different and more sharable is required so that the public can be oriented effectively.

• Continue to the 4th level/type of work: constructing narratives.

Originally posted: 14-Nov-2022. Last updated 30-Jun-2023.