|
COME INSIDE, OR STAY OUTSIDE?
The choice that those who oppose an official program are faced with
is
whether to join with other opposers in a group, or (if the invitation is
offered)
to cooperate with the administration, hoping to influence the program from in-
side. The positives and negatives are something like this:
INSIDE
OUTSIDE
Have the ear of the
administration Administration
says you are just a
complainer, never help out
Have information about what
is Don't
know what is going on, except
happening in the
program
for rumors and isolated examples
May have some influence on
the May have some
influence on the
program
program
Get recognition as a
cooperator
Get recognition as an opposer
When there is opposition,
an administration that is wise tries to enlist
its opponents into supporting its plans. This is
usually done by offering some concession. The concession may be just for show--giving someone attention
or an empty title--or it may be real. Advisory boards are somewhere in between. The process is called "cooptation."
The City in this case would enlist its opponents to join in a dialogue about the nature of the shelter,
promising that the City would listen to their ideas, although not necessarily adopt them. The cost, on the City's part, is sending
someone to the meetings, and being flexible enough to change minor items that the advisory board brings up.
The City gains an even greater benefit in the long run, because after the non-profit operator takes over, the advisory board will act as a monitor, and
will identify errors or failures that the non-profit agency makes. These errors would not be visible to the City as quickly if the advisory board were not there
to point them out. So the advisory board does part of the City's work of monitoring services. The advisory board and the agency will argue, and the City
will be above the fight, acting as referee. This is a much nicer position to be in, from the City's point of view.
Go to Concepts Page |