model tensions
According to (Janssen et al. 2015), there are four model tensions which are, simplicity, generality, validity, and formality. Tension, as defined by Janssen et al. (2015), is the feeling that is produced in an event when people are anxious and do not trust each other and when there is the possibility of sudden violence or conflict. According to the authors, when making policy and policy simulation, there is a need for finding various ways of avoiding tension that is made in the policymaking. Tension is created between and within four components of the implementing process, idealized policy, implementing organizations, target group, and environmental factors. The tensions bring about exchange designs that could conceivably coordinate the desires for the result of the policy formulators. The exchange examples may get solidified into foundations. Both the exchange designs and the organizations may create tensions which, by criticism to the policymakers and practitioners, may support or reject further usage of the strategy. By utilization of the model, policymakers can endeavor to limit troublesome tensions, which can bring about the disappointment of policy results to coordinate policy desires.
The model tension I would choose for this is validity. Tensions don’t have planned format, and for this case, the formality is essential as it helps in discussing the tension. Validity is the degree to which a concept, end, or estimation is well-established and likely compares precisely to this present reality. It is commonly acknowledged that the idea of logical validity tends to the concept of truth as far as accurate measures, and all things considered is an epistemological and philosophical issue just as an issue of estimation. The utilization of the term in rationale is smaller, identifying with the reality of surmising produced using premises. In logic, and along these lines as the time is applied to any epistemological case, validity alludes to the consistency of a contention spilling out of the premises to the end; in that capacity, the reality of the case in rationale isn’t just dependent on validity.