The Science of "Muddling Through' By CHARLES E.LINDBLOM Associate Professor of Economics Yale University >Short courses,books,and articles exhort admin- istrators to make decisions more methodically,but there has been little analysis of the decision-making UPPOSE an administrator is given respon- process now used by public administrators.The usual process is investigated here-and generally de- sibility for formulating policy with re- fended against proposals for more "scientific"meth- spect to inflation.He might start by try- ods. ing to list all related values in order of Decisions of individual administrators,of course, importance,e.g.,full employment,reasonable must be integrated with decisions of others to form the mosaic of public policy.This integration business profit,protection of small savings, of individual decisions has become the major con- prevention of a stock market crash.Then all cern of organization theory,and the way individuals possible policy outcomes could be rated as make decisions necessarily affects the way those de- more or less efficient in attaining a maximum cisions are best meshed with others'.In addition, of these values.This would of course require decision-making method relates to allocation of de a prodigious inquiry into values held by cision-making responsibility-who should make what decision. members of society and an equally prodigious More "scientific"decision-making also is dis set of calculations on how much of each value cussed in this issue:"Tools for Decision-Making in is equal to how much of each other value.He Resources Planning.” could then proceed to outline all possible policy alternatives.In a third step,he would undertake systematic comparison of his multi- ployment.He would in fact disregard most tude of alternatives to determine which at- other social values as beyond his present in- tains the greatest amount of values. terest,and he would for the moment not even In comparing policies,he would take ad- attempt to rank the few values that he re- vantage of any theory available that general- garded as immediately relevant.Were he ized about classes of policies.In considering pressed,he would quickly admit that he was inflation,for example,he would compare all ignoring many related values and many pos- policies in the light of the theory of prices. sible important consequences of his policies. Since no alternatives are beyond his investi- As a second step,he would outline those gation,he would consider strict central con- relatively few policy alternatives that occurred trol and the abolition of all prices and mar- to him.He would then compare them.In kets on the one hand and elimination of all comparing his limited number of alternatives, public controls with reliance completely on inost of them familiar from past controversies, the free market on the other,both in the light he would not ordinarily find a body of theory of whatever theoretical generalizations he precise enough to carry him through a com- could find on such hypothetical economies. parison of their respective consequences.In- Finally,he would try to make the choice stead he would rely heavily on the record of that would in fact maximize his values. past experience with small policy steps to pre- An alternative line of attack would be to dict the consequences of similar steps ex- set as his principal objective,either explicitly tended into the future. or without conscious thought,the relatively Moreover,he would find that the policy al- simple goal of keeping prices level.This ob- ternatives combined objectives or values in jective might be compromised or complicated different ways.For example,one policy might by only a few other goals,such as full em- offer price level stability at the cost of some 79The Science of "Muddling Through" By CHARLES E. LINDBLOM Associate Professor of Economics Yale University S UPPOSE an administrator is given respon￾sibility for formulating policy with re￾spect to inflation. He might start by try￾ing to list all related values in order of importance, e.g., full employment, reasonable business profit, protection of small savings, prevention of a stock market crash. Then all possible policy outcomes could be rated as more or less efficient in attaining a maximum of these values. This would of course require a prodigious inquiry into values held by members of society and an equally prodigious set of calculations on how much of each value is equal to how much of each other value. He could then proceed to outline all possible policy alternatives. In a third step, he would undertake systematic comparison of his multi￾tude of alternatives to determine which at￾tains the greatest amount of values. In comparing policies, he would take ad￾vantage of any theory available that general￾ized about classes of policies. In considering inflation, for example, he would compare all policies in the light of the theory of prices. Since no alternatives are beyond his investi￾gation, he would consider strict central con￾trol and the abolition of all prices and mar￾kets on the one hand and elimination of all public controls with reliance completely on the free market on the other, both in the light of whatever theoretical generalizations he could find on such hypothetical economies. Finally, he would try to make the choice that would in fact maximize his values. An alternative line of attack would be to set as his principal objective, either explicitly or without conscious thought, the relatively simple goal of keeping prices level. This ob￾jective might be compromised or complicated by only a few other goals, such as full em- > Short courses, books, and articles exhort admin￾istrators to make decisions more methodically, but there has been little analysis of the decision-making process now used by public administrators. The usual process is investigated here-and generally de￾fended against proposals for more "scientific" meth￾ods. Decisions of individual administrators, of course, must be integrated with decisions of others to form the mosaic of public policy. This integration of individual decisions has become the major con￾cern of organization theory, and the way individuals make decisions necessarily affects the way those de￾cisions are best meshed with others'. In addition, decision-making method relates to allocation of de￾cision-making responsibility-who should make what decision. More "scientific" decision-making also is dis￾cussed in this issue: "Tools for Decision-Making in Resources Planning." ployment. He would in fact disregard most other social values as beyond his present in￾terest, and he would for the moment not even attempt to rank the few values that he re￾garded as immediately relevant. Were he pressed, he would quickly admit that he was ignoring many related values and many pos￾sible important consequences of his policies. As a second step, he would outline those relatively few policy alternatives that occurred to him. He would then compare them. In comparing his limited number of alternatives, most of them familiar from past controversies, he would not ordinarily find a body of theory precise enough to carry him through a com￾parison of their respective consequences. In￾stead he would rely heavily on the record of past experience with small policy steps to pre￾dict the consequences of similar steps ex￾lended into the future. Moreover, he would find that the policy al￾ternatives combined objectives or values in different ways. For example, one policy might offer price level stability at the cost of some