Chapter 3.

Analyzing Role Occupant (Stakeholder) Behavior Using the ROCCIPI Problem-Solving Methodology

By the end of this chapter, students will be able to analyze and explain the causes of a role occupant’s behavior using the ROCCIPI problem-solving methodology. Behavior will be analyzed using both the objective ROCCIPI factors (rules, opportunity, capacity, communication, and process) and the subjective factors (interest and ideology).

NOTE: In the Indonesian version, put the ROCCIPI factors in the appropriate order to match the “PKKPKKI” acronym. (See note later in chapter.)

Teaching Notes

Recommended Instructional Outline:

Lesson 2 consists of an interactive lecture session lasting about 2 hours and 15 minutes, with one in-class assignment. There is a homework assignment at the end of the lesson.

The lecture is as follows:

1. Review of Lesson 2 (15 minutes). Review Lesson 2 objectives. Resolve any outstanding questions the students may have from Lesson 2. There was no homework assignment for Lesson 2, but you should prompt students to discuss how they may passively apply ROCCIPI analysis to problems they see every day.

2. Preview of Lesson 3 (15 minutes). Preview Lesson 3, using the chapter outline above.

3. Lecture (1 hour). The main lecture portion will teach students to use the ROCCIPI problem-solving methodology to explain the behavior of the role occupant (or stakeholder), including the following factors:

(a) Objective factors: (1) rules, (2) opportunity, (3) capacity, (4) communication, and (5) process.

(b) Subjective factors: (1) interest, and (2) ideology.

4. In-Class Assignment (45 minutes). The in-class assignment will deal with the problem of traffic jams that was first introduced in Lesson 1. The students will work in groups to develop a report analyzing the behavior of the primary role occupant (or stakeholder).

Figure 3.1. [Insert description of figure or picture here.]

3. Introduction

The last chapter introduced the ROCCIPI problem-solving methodology (or agenda) and described how the methodology can be used to develop working hypotheses that explain problematic social behavior. This chapter will teach you to use the ROCCIPI agenda specifically to analyze the behavior of role occupants (or stakeholders) and develop explanation for the behavior. In doing this, we will look at each ROCCIPI factor individually to examine how the factor can explain role occupant behavior. We will first look at the objective ROCCIPI factors (rules, opportunity, capacity, communication, and process), then we will look at the subjective factors (interest and ideology). These explanations will eventually be used to develop and formulate potential solutions that are designed to address these explanations of the causes of problematic behavior.

NOTE: In the Indonesian version, put the ROCCIPI factors in the appropriate order to match the “PKKPKKI” acronym.

NOTE: List the factors in the order that is appropriate for the language and acronym used.

In English, use “(1) rules, (2) opportunity, (3) capacity, (4) communication, and (5) process” — from “ROCCIPI”.

In Indonesian, use “(1) peraturan [‘rule’], (2) kesempatan [‘opportunity’], (3) kemampuan [‘capacity’], (4) proces [‘process’], and (5) komunikasi [‘communication’]” — from “PKKPKKI”.

4. Using the ROCCIPI problem-solving methodology to analyze role occupants (and stakeholders)

(a) Objective Factors

Remember from the previous chapter that the objective ROCCIPI factors are (1) rules, (2) opportunity, (3) capacity, (4) communication, and (5) process. We will now examining these factors to explain the problematic behavior of role occupants (or stakeholders).

(1) Rules

The “rules” factor includes all the laws, rules, and social norms within which the role occupant (or stakeholder) behaves. It may be strange at first to examine the rules (or law) as the cause of bad behavior. After all, the law is supposed to express a community’s normative ideal. However, existing rules may have unintended loopholes that allow problematic behavior. Or rules may be written in such vague or imprecise language that role occupants (or stakeholders) have too much discretion. The rules may also be written in such difficult or arcane language (for instance, “legalese”) that, for all practical purposes, it is not accessible to addressees (those whom the rules are intended to govern). Thus, an initial examination of the rules that affect (or are intended to affect) each role occupant (or stakeholder) is the first step in the ROCCIPI examination of role occupant (or stakeholder) behavior.

Topic for Discussion

Where would you look, who would you talk to, and what questions would you ask in order to understand how rules contribute to people’s behavior?

Teaching Note

Use the discussion topics to encourage a free exchange regarding the ROCCIPI factors. Students will only get a good grasp of the factors and how the affect behavior by discussing them in relation to “real-life” situations.

(2) Opportunity and Capacity

The factors of “opportunity” and “capacity” are the objective factors (such as skills, knowledge, and access to resources) that influence behavior. In practice, explaining a problem in terms of opportunity and capacity is sometimes difficult because those factors are sometimes hard to distinguish from each other. These factors are often thought of together because a role occupant (or stakeholder) must have both the opportunity and the capacity (or capability) to engage in either the problematic or the desired (or preferred) behavior. Thus, a problem in which the role occupant (or stakeholder) has the opportunity to engage in the desired or preferred behavior, but not the capacity to engage in the behavior, would call for a solution that provides that opportunity. If the role occupant (or stakeholder) has the opportunity, but not the capacity (or capability) to engage in the desired or preferred behavior, the solution should focus on improving the role occupant’s (or stakeholder’s) capacity, which is often referred to as ‘capacity-building’.

Opportunity is the chance [NOTE for translation: ‘chance’ here is NOT ‘fortune’ or ‘luck’] to engage in the problematic behavior. Solutions to problems of opportunity will include (1) eliminating a role occupant’s opportunity to engage in the problematic behavior, or (2) providing a role occupant the opportunity to engage in the desired or preferred behavior.

Capacity is the role occupant’s ability or capability to engage in problematic or desired (or preferred) behavior. Solutions to problems of capacity will include (1) limiting the capacity of the role occupant (or stakeholder) to engage in the problematic behavior, or (2) capacity-building to improve or enhance the role occupant’s ability to engage in the desired or preferred behavior.

Consider the following example. Drafters of an education law are trying to understand why Jakarta University has such a low number of Papuan students. They discover that even though the students had the opportunity to attend (admissions did not discriminate on the basis of place of origin), few had the capacity to attend (they could not afford tuition, room and board, and books). One appropriate solution might involve increasing Papuan students’ financial ability to attend, such as through scholarships or grants targeted at those students.

Teaching Note

Distinguishing between opportunity and capacity is often difficult for students. At this point in the lesson, you may want to present as an example students’ own opportunity to understand the ROCCIPI agenda (it is being presented to them) as distinguished from their capacity to understand and utilize it.

When analyzing opportunity and capacity, it is important to emphasize that opportunity and capacity are both (1) the opportunity and capacity to engage in problematic behavior, and (2) the lack of opportunity or capacity to engage in the desired or preferred behavior.

(3) Communication

The “communication” factor is very important. We must ask whether the role occupant (or stakeholder) is aware of the rule or law that requires, permits, or prohibits certain behavior. What good is a rule if it is not communicated to the addressees? Often, role occupants (and stakeholders) engage in problematic behavior simply because they are unaware that there is a rule or law prohibiting it. They may also fail to engage in desired or preferred behavior because they are unaware of a rule or law permitting or requiring it.

Pro forma communication (for instance, in a parliamentary record) is rarely enough to ensure that role occupants (and stakeholders) have the information needed to behave appropriately. Effective communication, directed at the likely role occupants (and stakeholders) is needed — but often neglected — when writing laws. Thus, solutions to problems of communication will include provisions for informing those affected by the rule or law, so that they are aware of what the law or rule requires, permits, or prohibits and can therefore conform their behavior appropriately. (Note that problems of communication will rarely be the only explanation for problematic behavior or for the failure of a role occupant, or stakeholder, to engage in desired or preferred behavior.)

Topic for Discussion

Consider the role that communication plays in other ROCCIPI factors. Does communicating the true cost or benefit of certain behavior affect someone’s interest or incentive calculation in deciding whether to engage, or to refrain from engaging, in that behavior? Does communicating the ideological implications of certain behavior better help someone behave appropriately?

(4) Process

The “process” factor looks for explanations for problematic behavior linked to procedures or processes that lead to the behavior. Have you ever been discouraged from doing something simply because it took too long or was too complicated? If so, your behavior was influenced by “process”. Process explanations are not found in every social problem, but can provide a surprisingly simple explanation for unwanted behavior.

For example, problematic behavior relating to licensing, membership, or payment of taxes can be understood by examining the process involved. Thus, a driver may have decided not to obtain a driving license simply because the procedure was unclear or unnecessarily complicated (by long bureaucratic delays or going to multiple locations to obtain the license, for instance). The complicated process involved may explain part of the driver’s failure to obtain a driving license. One part of a solution may be to simplify the process to encourage drivers to choose to obtain the license rather than to drive without a license.

Topic for Discussion

1. University life offers many examples of how process influences behavior. Is class registration overly complex and time-consuming? Does this influence student behavior in choosing courses? What, if any, improvements would you suggest to the registration process at your university?

2. Where would you look, who would you talk to, and what questions would you ask in order to understand how process causes drivers to pay bribes when stopped by the police for a minor traffic violation?

(b) Subjective factors

The previous chapter described the subjective ROCCIPI factors, which are (1) interest and (2) ideology. We will now examining these factors to explain the problematic behavior of role occupants (or stakeholders).

(1) Interest

The “interest” factor is often described as incentive. When analyzing problematic behavior, we need to know the role occupant’s (or stakeholder’s) material (usually monetary) and non-material incentives for engaging in the problematic behavior. Sometimes the explanation will be one of a lack of incentive for the role occupant (or stakeholder) to engage in the desired or preferred behavior. Solutions for a problem of interest will include (1) eliminating or reducing the role occupant’s (or stakeholder’s) interest or incentive to engage in the problematic behavior, or (2) introducing or increasing the role occupant’s (or stakeholder’s) interest or incentive to engage in the desired or preferred behavior.

For example, we may ask whether the role occupant earns money or saves money (by reducing an expense, for instance) by engaging in the problematic behavior? If so, is there a way to increase the cost to the role occupant of the bad behavior to discourage the problematic behavior? Conversely, is there a way to provide monetary or other incentives to encourage the desired or preferred behavior?

Teaching Note

Be careful not to use too expansive a definition of interest or incentive (as some economists do). While it is a broad factor, it is not an all-encompassing factor. By explaining all behavior in terms of incentive and by equating incentive with monetary gain, we unnecessarily limit ourselves to a set of monetary-based policy solutions and ignore other factors that influence behavior.

For example, ask the students to explain, in terms of monetary incentive, why a mother cares for and protects her newborn child even at the risk of her own life?

In answering this question, the students may consider the mother’s religious beliefs or other values and attitudes, which will lead into the next section on the ROCCIPI factor of “ideology”.

(2) Ideology

The “ideology” factor refers to the values and attitudes that influence behavior (as opposed to the material and non-material incentives). These include social, political, and religious values and beliefs. These are subjective because each person’s (or group’s) values, attitudes, and beliefs are unique and the same values, attitudes, and beliefs may affect different individuals or groups differently.

Here are some examples of ideological explanations for “real-life” situations:

· Religious belief probably is the primary explanation or the fact that there is little or no pork consumption in Lombock.

· A prevalent local social, political, or religious ideology very likely influences the amount of money donated to the poor in a certain community.

Of course, the cause of a role occupant’s (or stakeholder’s) behavior does not necessarily have to fit into some already established school or pattern of ideology. For instance, ideology does not need to be identified as Muslim, capitalist, or democratic in order to explain behavior. Because of the subjective nature of ideology, and because of ideology affects different people and groups differently, it is sometimes necessary to develop non-traditional ideological explanations for a role occupant’s (or stakeholder’s) behavior.

Teaching Note

Be careful not to explain all behavior in terms of ideology (as some sociologists do). Like interest, ideology is a broad factor, but it is not an all-encompassing factor.

5. Using the ROCCIPI agenda to create hypotheses about role occupants (and stakeholders)

In-Class Assignment:
The Problem of Traffic Jams

Now that you have an understanding of the ROCCIPI factors and how the factors relate to the behavior of role occupants (and stakeholders), you can use them to analyze, explain, and understand problematic behavior in order to create effective policy solutions.

Consider again the problem of traffic jams in Makassar. Use the materials about the problem of traffic jams from Chapter 1 (and the materials on the following pages) to fill in the ROCCIPI categories in Figure 3.2 below. Prepare an analysis of the ROCCIPI factors for the role occupant (or stakeholder) identified in the in-class assignment in Lesson 1.

Figure 3.2. Analysis of ROCCIPI factors for the primary role occupant (or stakeholder).

	Factor:	Hypothesis or Explanation:
R	Rule
O	Opportunity
C	Capacity
C	Communication
I	Interest
P	Process
I	Ideology

Figure 3.3. [Indonesian version:] Analysis of PKKPKKI factors for the primary role occupant (or stakeholder).

	Factor:	Hypothesis or Explanation:
P	Peraturan
K	Kesempatan
K	Kemampuan
P	Proces
K	Komunikasi
K	Kepentingan
I	Ideologi

Figure 3.4. [Insert description of figure or picture here.]

NOTE: Insert additional articles not used in chapter 2 here if it concerns the role occupant.

Figure 3.5. [Insert description of figure or picture here.]

NOTE: Insert Muktasam’s “Traffic Congestion: Dilemma in Developing Countries’ Cities”.

Teaching Note

In-Class Assignment

Break the class into the same groups as in Lesson 1. Instruct the groups to work for about 30 minutes to prepare an analysis of the ROCCIPI factors for the role occupant (or stakeholder) they identified in the in-class assignment in Lesson 1.

Then reconvene the class reconvene and ask each group to report its analysis and discuss it with the class. (The group discussions should last about 15 minutes total.)

Figure 3.6. Progress chart.

NOTE: Pipit, please insert progress chart here. Use dark outlines for the steps already covered and dotted lines for the steps not yet taken. Muktasam and Gau used the chart.

[Insert chart HERE.]

6. Homework assignment

Prepare a one-page analysis for the behavior of the role occupant you identified in your Chapter 1 homework assignment (on page ___) using the objective and subjective ROCCIPI factors.

7. Further reading

The following materials provide further information about the issues discussed in this chapter and may be referred to for additional information.

Ann Seidman, Robert B. Seidman, and Nalin Abeysekere, Legislative Drafting for Democratic Social Change (Indonesian version, 2d ed.), ELIPS II National Library, Jakarta, 2002. Pages 85–123.

NOTE: The appropriate pages for the above Seidman reference should be the pages in the Indonesian version that correspond with pages 85–123 in the English version. (This identical reference is used in Chapters 2–4.)

Ann Seidman, Robert B. Seidman, and Nalin Abeysekere, Assessing Legislation: A Manual for Legislators, online at http://www.bu.edu/law/lawdrafting/manual/, 2003. Chapters 6 and 8.

M. Irfan Islamy, Prinsip-Prinsip Perumusan Kebijaksanaa Negara, Ed. 2, print 10, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta, 2001. Pages ___.

Ronny Hanitiyo Soemitro, Studi Hukum dan Masyarakat, Alumni, Bandung, 1985. Pages 1–54 and 118–165.

Satjipto Rahardjo, Masalah Penegakan Hukum Suatu Tinjauan Sosiologis, Sinar Baru, Bandung, [CLICK HERE TO FINISH THIS CITATION]. Pages 15–29.

Sedarmayanti, Good Governance (Kepemerintahan yang Baik) Dalam Rangka Otonomi Daerah, Mandar Maju, Bandung, 2003. Pages 1–29.

Solichin Abdul Wahab, Analisis Kebijaksanaan, Dari Formulasi ke Implementasi Kebijaksanaan Negara, Ed.2, Bumi aksara, Jakarta, 2002. Pages 1–15.

NOTES:

1. These Indonesian sources should be checked for accuracy with respect to (1) the precise author(s), book title, etc., (2) consistency in form among the citations, (3) consistency among the citations that are repeated in other chapters, and (4) actual chapter or page references.

2. Any inappropriate references (that is, the book or material is not applicable to the lesson) should be omitted.