A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

System Reforms: Perspectives on Personalizing Education - September 1994

Conclusion

In summary, in complex societies, the elements will never be in complete harmony. In such situations top-down strategies result in conflict and/or superficial compliance. Expecting local units to flourish through laissez-faire decentralization leads to drift, ad hocness and/or inertia. Combined strategies which capitalize on the center's strengths (to provide perspective direction, incentives, networking, and retrospective monitoring) and local capacity (to learn, create, respond to, and feed into overall directions) are more likely to achieve greater overall coherence. Such systems also have greater accountability because the need to obtain political support for ideas are built-in to the patterns of interaction.

The reason that simultaneous top-down/bottom-up strategies are essential is that dynamically complex societies are always full of surprises (Senge, 1990, Stacey, 1992). Only the negotiated capacity and strengths of the center and the locals, in combination, are capable of pushing for improvement while retaining the capacity to learn from new patterns, whether anticipated or not. Finally, and paradoxically, one level cannot wait for the other to get its act together. The way that systems change for the better, is that individuals and small groups of individuals intersect, and find kindred spirits, locally and centrally. Systems don't change by themselves. Individuals change systems, acting individually and together regardless of how ineffective they perceive others around them. Breakthroughs occur when productive connections add up to create growing pressure for systems to change (Fullan, in press). The more that top-down and bottom-up forces are coordinated, the more likely that complex systems will move toward greater effectiveness.
-###-

[Coordinating Top-Down and Bottom-Up Strategies (Continued)] [Table of Contents] [References]