Chase Issue Management Cycles

Issue Identification

The first stage of the Chase issue management model is that of issue identification. Issue identification “starts with consideration of trends which precede issues” (1984, p. 11). An issue is defined as an “unsettled matter which is ready for decision,” whereas trends “are detectable changes which precede issues” (1984, p. 11). This is the stage in [Page 123]which a futurist research approach is taken toward issues that may affect an organization. Chase recommends that issues be classified according to their type (e.g., social, economic, political, or technological), impact and response source (e.g., business system, industry, corporation, subsidiary, or department), geography (e.g., international, national, regional, state, or local), span of control (e.g., noncontrollable, semicontrollable, or controllable), and salience (e.g., immediacy, or prominence). The idea is that since it is impossible to manage every issue, a company must develop a process by which it can classify issues.

Issue Analysis

The second stage, issue analysis, involves the application of theory and research to analyze the identified trends and issues. The idea of this stage of the model is that social, economic, and political trends affect how issues develop. The use of quantitative (e.g., public opinion surveys, and content analyses) and qualitative analysis (e.g., statements by opinion leaders) helps to aid the process. The point of such analysis, then, is to use the data in order to make judgments about issues and to set priorities to aid in determining which issues warrant an organizational response.

Issue Change Strategy Options

Issue change strategy options, the third stage of the Chase model, describe an organization's “basic decisions … on the corporation's response to challenges and opportunities posed by one issue within the public policy process” (1984, p. 15). Jones and Chase offered the following three potential issue stances by organizations: reactive, adaptive, and dynamic. The reactive approach is best characterized as “stonewalling” an issue. An adaptive approach indicates an openness to change that seeks to offer accommodations on emerging issues; that is, an organization seeks to participate in final public policy decision making. The third approach, and the one advocated by Jones and Chase, is the dynamic approach: “This strategy anticipates and attempts to shape the direction of public policy decisions by determining the theater of war, the weapons to be used, and the timing of the battle itself. In other words, the company employing the dynamic strategy directs change by developing real solutions to real problems with real results” (1984, p. 17). The authors suggested that “the dynamic option can be used in combination with the Reactive and Adaptive to create a fourth change strategy option that is paradigmatically realistic over time” (1984, p. 17).

...