This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (28) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Van de Ven, A. H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Problem Solving, Planning, and Innovation. Part I. Test of the Program Planning Model

The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104.

This longitudinal research compares the Program Planning Model (PPM) with a conventional (non-PPM) planning model in the context of creating 14 new child care programs in local Texas communities. The programs planned according to the PPM are found to have more efficient services and greater community acceptance during their first year of implementation than the programs that were developed with the conventional planning process. Due to the absence of random assignments, it is not demonstrated that these results are due to planning processes alone. However, evidence is presented that suggests the PPM projects outperformed the non-PPM projects because implementation success correlates with five key dimensions of planning behavior. Implementation success increases with: (1) participation of citizens, experts, and community interest groups; (2) involvement of a policy board representing partisan interests; (3) greater and more equal distribution of planning team effort; (4) process consultation in early planning phases; and (5) fewer deviations from the PPM procedural model in allphases of planning. The implications of this research for theory and practice will be discussed in a companion Part II of this article.

Human Relations, Vol. 33, No. 10, 711-740 (1980)
DOI: 10.1177/001872678003301003


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Talvitie Theoryless Planning Planning Theory, May 1, 2009; 8(2): 166 - 190. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. W. Gerbing, J. G. Hamilton, and E. B. Freeman A Large-scale Second-order Structural Equation Model of the Influence of Management Participation on Organizational Planning Benefits Journal of Management, August 1, 1994; 20(4): 859 - 885. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. D. Bruton and W. B. Hildreth Strategic Public Planning: External Orientations and Strategic Planning Team Members The American Review of Public Administration, December 1, 1993; 23(4): 307 - 317. [Abstract]

				F. Strehl Implementation of a New Performance Appraisal System and the Problems of Organizational Change International Review of Administrative Sciences, March 1, 1993; 59(1): 83 - 97.

				F. J. Milliken and D. A. Vollrath Strategic Decision-Making Tasks and Group Effectiveness: Insights from Theory and Research on Small Group Performance Human Relations, December 1, 1991; 44(12): 1229 - 1253. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. M. Bryson, P. Bromiley, and Yoon Soo Jung Influences of Context and Process on Project Planning Success Journal of Planning Education and Research, July 1, 1990; 9(3): 183 - 195. [Abstract]

				A. H. Van de Ven, R. Hudson, and D. M. Schroeder Designing New Business Startups: Entrepreneurial, Organizational, and Ecological Considerations Journal of Management, April 1, 1984; 10(1): 87 - 108. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. H. Van de Ven Problem Solving, Planning, and Innovation. Part II. Speculations for Theory and Practice Human Relations, November 1, 1980; 33(11): 757 - 779. [Abstract] [PDF]