Policy Implementation From a Micropolitical Perspective

• In Event: Predictable Patterns: An Approach to Bridging Policy-Implementations Gaps in Service of Educational Equity

Abstract

Objective
Across school systems at federal, state, and local levels, individuals consciously and unconsciously draw on various sources of power—their formal position of authority; their social, cultural, and intellectual capital; and intersectional identities—to support and resist policies in ways that advance their individual and collective interests. This paper examines how these micropolitical dynamics, mediated by complex social environments, often determine whether policies are implemented in ways that realize their goals or are altered, appropriated, or
simply ignored (Blase, 1991; Iannaccone, 1975; Malen, 2006).

Understanding implementation from a micropolitical perspective is particularly important for policies that aim to advance educational equity, because the students and communities those policies aim to serve have historically lacked power in public school systems (Gillborn, 2005, 2014; Scott & Holme, 2016). As such, efforts to alter the status quo are often stymied by influential actors seeking to preserve their advantaged positions or tacitly upholding structures and practices that perpetuate inequities. Thus, any attempt to advance equity via policy must acknowledge these political realities.

Theoretical Framework and Methods
This literature review paper draws on scholarship from the past 40 years focusing on how politics and micropolitics impact policy implementation. Adding to the traditional political perspective, the paper amplifies how race often influences whether individuals and groups can leverage power. The resulting framework shows how implementers draw on their various forms of power, often from relational attributes, to engage in predictable patterns of behavior during implementation, including: 1) policy advancement and amplification, 2) policy erosion, 3) policy nullification, and 4) policy appropriation.

Results
The paper illustrates two of these predictable patterns with a case based on research on New York City’s Schoolwide Performance Bonus Program (SPBP)—and example of two types of
education policy that have enduring popularity in the United States: pay-for-performance and participatory policies (Author, 2012).

The micropolitics framework helps explain why SPBP implementation outcomes did not always align with policy goals, and why the values of collaboration won out over competition. In some cases, principals used their formal power (derived from being in a position of authority) to advance their own interests. Their overt and covert assertions of power (e.g., unilaterally making decisions, concealing information, controlling the agenda) help explain why some schools did not implement the policy (policy nullification). However, policy design elements (e.g., consensus rules) and local contextual forces, including the race of principals, teachers, and community, appeared to temper principals’ exercise of power in most schools districtwide, where committees generally implemented the policies (policy advancement). Even though administrators may have wanted to reward particular staff members for their individual performance, egalitarian school norms, a tendency to avoid conflict, and a reluctance on the part of black principals to use their power, greatly countered these preferences and assertions of power.

Significance
The analytic tools and predictive patterns of a micropolitical lens can assist researchers, educators, leaders, advocates, and policymakers in understanding policy implementation at all levels of the education system. By anticipating likely challenges and opportunities due to these political dynamics, educational leaders and policymakers can design better policies and plans for implementation.

Author

• Julie A. Marsh, University of Southern California