www.ijird.com April, 2021 Vol10 Issue 4 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT DOI No. : 10.24940/ijird/2021/v10/i4/APR21072 Page 243 Re-thinking the Paradox in Policy Implementation: Does Implementation Analysis Perspective Have Anything to Offer? 1. Introduction Research on policy implementation has been a scholarly ‘hot potato’ among social scientists since the 1970s when Pressman and Wildavsky (1973) brought the intricacy of policy implementation to the front burners of academic discourse (Goggin, Bowman, Lester & O’Toole, 1990; Paudel, 2009; Winter, 2003 etc.). The main aim of research at that time, according to Paudel (2009, p. 36) ‘was to find out a concrete theory of policy implementation’. Since then, attention appears to have shifted, particularly towards the end of the century, from the focus on theory of implementation to seeing implementation as a topical issue of research, and hence the advent of the term ‘implementation analysis’ as a discipline of study and research (Khan, 2016; Lane, 1983; Paudel, 2009). Be that as it may, in discussions about why policy implementation outcomes most often differ from policy intentions and objectives envisioned by policy-makers, a number of perspectives, including: change management perspective (Everard, Morris & Wilson, 2004; Fullan, 1988, 2001; etc.) alternative democratic/participatory perspective (Dunning, 1993;Shulock, 1999); post-modernist perspective (Ball, 1994; Olssen, Codd& O’Neil, 2004;Trowler, 1998)ferminist perspective (Bacchi, 1999; Ladwig, 1994; Taylor, Rizvi, Lingard& Henry, 1997 etc.); and actor-network theory of policy change (Cressman, 2009;Law, 1992; Pohle, 2013) etc.: get mentioned and rationalised to explain and/or unravel the causal factors of this implementation conundrum referred to in the context of this paper as the ‘policy implementation paradox’ 1 . Interestingly in these discussions, and whether by design or as faith would have it, implementation analysis 2 gets skated over or relegated to background as if to say it has nothing important to contribute to understanding this policy milieu. Meanwhile, implementation analysis is claimed to offer not just evaluation techniques for the assessment of public programme performances, but also guidance for the successful attainment policy objectives (Lane, 1983). This paper brings back to the front-burners of policy sociology and policy analysis, the ‘age-old’ debate concerning howthe policy/practice gap could be re-conceptualised for rumination. To achieve this aim, the paper gleans, synthesizes and examines literature from disparate sources (including but not limited to: education policy, public policy, change management, policy sociology, sociology of education, politics and/or governance) with the view to unearthing insights that implementation analysis has to share to help unravel the issue of the apparent paradox in policy implementation. Through this endeavour, the key ingredients in policy implementation analysis are identified and explained to help ISSN 2278 – 0211 (Online) Hope Pius Nudzor Associate Professor, Institute for Educational Planning and Administration, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana Abstract: In theory, implementation analysis is claimed to offer not just evaluation techniques for assessing public programme performances but also guidance for successful attainment of policy objectives. Yet, in discussions about why implementation efforts do not yield desired outcomes, implementation analysis is skated over as if it has nothing to offer. This paper gleans literature from disparate sources to distil insights that implementation analysis perspective has to share on this phenomenon. Through this endeavour, the key ingredients in implementation analysis proposition are identified and explained to help unravel this paradox in policy implementation. The implementation analysis perspective contends that the paradox in policy implementation occurs because implementation as a multi- dimensional concept is underestimated, misunderstood and misapplied by implementers. As such, they are not able to implement and manage educational policy initiatives successfully. Against this backdrop, the paper argues that implementation analysis could, if its potential is realized, take policy analysis further than evaluation research or social impact analysis. Owing essentially to the inter-linkages that implementation analysis draws between the various ingredients making-up the complete implementation proposition, the paper concludes that implementation should not be viewed merely as the second stage of putting policy into practice but integral to processes of policy- making. Keywords: Policy-making, policy implementation, implementation analysis, policy implementation paradox, policy/practice gap, implementation proposition