Arguably, Lasswell’s understanding of the model of the

policy process was more prescriptive

and normative rather than descriptive and analytical. His
linear sequence of the different stages had
been designed like a problem-solving model and accords
with other prescriptive rational models of
planning and decision-making developed in organization
theory and public administration. While
empirical studies of decision-making and planning in
organizations, known as the behavioral theory of
decision making (Simon 1947), have repeatedly pointed
out that real world decision-making usually
does not follow this sequence of discrete stages, the
stages perspective still counts as an ideal-type
of rational planning and decision-making. According to
such a rational model, any decision- making
should be based on a comprehensive analysis of
problems and goals, followed by an inclusive collection
and analysis of information and a search for the best
alternative to achieve these goals. This
includes the analysis of costs and benefi ts of the different
options and the fi nal selection of the course
of action. Measures have to be carried out (implemented)
and results appraised against the objectives
and adjusted if needed. One of the major reasons of the
success and durability of the stages typology
is therefore its appeal as a normative model for ideal-type,
rational, evidence-based policy making.
In addition, the notion is congruent with a basic democratic
understanding of elected politicians