The incremental model, also known as incrementalism or muddling through, is a decision-
making approach that involves making small, gradual changes to policy or actions rather than
trying to implement a broad, sweeping solution all at once. This model is often used in public
policy because it recognizes that policy deals with complex issues that involve multiple
stakeholders with diverse views and interests.
Ang incremental na modelo, na kilala rin bilang incrementalism o muddling through, ay isang
diskarte sa paggawa ng desisyon na nagsasangkot ng paggawa ng maliliit, unti-unting pagbabago
sa patakaran o mga aksyon sa halip na subukang magpatupad ng malawak, malawak na solusyon
nang sabay-sabay.
One of the key characteristics of incrementalism is that the process is not completely rational.
This means that - decision makers do not have all the information they need to make fully
informed decisions, and that information that is available may be ambiguous or subject to
interpretation. As a result, decision makers must rely on judgment, intuition, and experience to
make decisions.
There may be conflict and disagreement about the appropriate plan of action since different
stakeholders may have different perspectives on the means and outcomes. By allowing
stakeholders to make incremental agreements rather than striving to accomplish their goals all
at once, incrementalism promotes agreement and reduces pointless conflicts.
Because incrementalism allows for feedback and adjustment over time, it helps with the
development of legitimacy. Decision-makers can make sure that a policy is still relevant and
useful by introducing tiny modifications and then assessing their success.
One potential drawback of incrementalism is that it can be difficult to make progress on long-
term goals when the focus is always on short-term gains. For example, political short-term
concerns such as upcoming elections may be prioritized over long-term goals such as addressing
climate change.
Overall, the incremental model is a practical method of decision-making that acknowledges the
complexity of public policy issues and the importance of gradually gaining support and
legitimacy.
Characteristics of incrementalism model (muddling through)
1. Gradual progress: Incrementalism model suggests that small changes should be made incrementally
instead of large-scale radical changes.
2. Flexibility: This approach is flexible and adaptable since it allows for changes to be made in response
to changing circumstances.
3. Pragmatism: Incrementalism model allows for practical solutions to be implemented, rather than
idealistic or theoretical ones.
4. Resource Optimization: The approach focuses on maximizing resources by using them efficiently and
effectively to achieve small, manageable goals.
5. Consensus-building: Collaboration and consultation with stakeholders are emphasized to ensure buy-
in and support for proposed changes.
6. Reactive: This approach is reactive and tends to focus on solving immediate problems rather than
long-term strategic planning.
7. Trial and Error: Incrementalism model acknowledges that trial and error may be necessary in finding
solutions that work best in specific circumstances.
8. Decision-making: This approach involves repeated rounds of decision-making to respond to changing
circumstances, including monitoring and adjusting plans in light of new information.
9. Low Risk: The approach entails taking low-risk steps and small-scale solutions, minimizing the
potential for unintended consequences.
10. Slow Pace: The incrementalism model is often criticized for its slow pace, which may not be suitable
when rapid changes are called for.
Incrementalism means gradually making improvements or changes over time, instead of making
big and sudden changes all at once. It is the opposite of strict central planning, which can make
it harder to solve problems at a local level because the rules are inflexible. Incrementalism
allows for more flexibility in finding solutions to problems.
Some experts warn that if people only make small changes to try and solve a conflict, they might
not solve the bigger problems at the core of the issue. They might only make small changes
around the edges. This is because people might be afraid to make big changes. However, if
people only make small changes, they might miss out on better solutions that require bigger
changes.
