Planning thoery - Book Report/Review Example

Both Alexander and Darke deal with rationality and a number of concepts relating to it. There are a number of similarities between the two articles.They start off by isolating the idea of rationality so that a brief definition is established. The historical definition is taken into consideration and its various pitfalls examined. The rejection of ideas and resulting theories that evolved as a result of experiences and information collected through the senses is noted. Rather, theories that resulted from information gathering and analysis through mathematical methods were adopted.

However, in doing so, the manipulation of the system to achieve certain desired objectives has been the effect. This has been demonstrated to be one of the traditional methods. In addition, the idea that a universally relevant and applicable value system of rationality has been refuted by both the authors through several illustrations time and again. However, Alexander (2000, p. 243) notes that there is merit even in the pursuit of such a universal system even if it is non - existent since it adds perspective and value to the debate.

Rationality is further explored as a multidimensional subject with respect to values, goals, beliefs and finally the intended action required in a certain scenario. The importance of formal and substantive rationality is established in both works (Darke, 1985, p. 16-18) however, Alexander (2000, p. 247-249) goes on to deal with a number of other types of the phenomena. For example, communicative rationality is discussed, as the interaction between the various subjects and processes of a fair communication process in a given scenario.

Hence, the underlying assumptions and beliefs of various types of rationalities are dealt in greater detail by Alexander. Finally, each of the articles moves onto its area of specialization, namely rationality planning in the first case whereas in the second case, rationality is applied to the case of state programs. However, in both the cases, the negative effects of the application of a single definition of rationality are detailed. While the multidimensional approach of Alexander leads to more questions than answers, the application of rationality to the field of state run programs by Darke explores the various mistakes committed in the past.

Hence, it is essentially a suggestion for the future of such programs in which a more encompassing definition of the phenomena would prove beneficial. However, the work of both the authors approaches a common theme that of the need to consider a number of factors such as beliefs, experience, values in addition to the factors affecting the scenario at hand while applying rationality to planning. The application of rationality to real world problems encompassing such a multitude of factors necessitates the simplification of the models.

The processes involved in the decision making process for real world challenges are dealt with by Lindblom. He outlines the fundamental differences to different models of decision making in the real world and also lists the differences in theory and practice (1959, 81). In his own words, he also attempts to provide theoretical support to the methods most commonly used to solve complex real world problems. By dealing with the theoretical considerations of the decision making process, the author has been able to identify a number of implementation issues.

This compliments the work of Darke (1985, p. 23-24) rather than Alexander who deals with the various aspects concerning rationality planning. Rationality planning is only one of the issues that Lindblom deals with although it is not mentioned explicitly. While the study of the first two articles gives the impression that rationality has a number of dimensions and that it is important to apply a certain aspect or type of rationality depending on the situation, the third article stresses the fact that practical situations usually revert to iterations of previous decisions rather than the formation of a decision based on pure theory.

Therefore, it is represented as an iterative process and goes on to conclude that it is the only possible and practical solution to complex practical issues. However, each of the articles has value in its own right and it is hard to compare one with the other without considering the factors against which they are measured. With respect to knowledge of rational planning and decision making, it could be concluded that a study of all three articles provides comprehensive knowledge to the reader since the issues covered in the articles are complementary as they provide theoretical and practical foundations of the topic.

Works Cited Alexander, Ernest R. “Rationality Revisited: Planning Paradigms in a Post-Postmodernist Perspective.” Journal of Planning Education and Research. vol. 19. issue 242. (2000): 242-256. Print. Darke, Roy (1985). Rational planning and the state. Rationality in planning. pp. 15-25. Print Lindblom, Charles. E. “The Science of Muddling Through.” Public Administration Review. Vol. 19. No. 2 (1959), pp 79-88.