03 · The Garbage Can Model

Organised Anarchy

Cohen, March and Olsen coined the term organised anarchy to describe organisations characterised by three properties: fuzzy preferences (the organisation’s goals are unclear, ill-defined, or inconsistent), unclear technology (members do not fully understand how the organisation actually produces outcomes), and fluid participation in decision-making (who shows up to which decision varies unpredictably). These dynamics play out in mixed, often improvised decision forums referred to as “garbage cans” or, in the academic terminology, “choice opportunities.”

Universities were the original case study. But the description applies to any organisation where the work is emergent, the environment is complex, and management instruments were designed for a simpler system.

The Four Streams

The Garbage Can Model describes organisations as the intersection of four independent streams: problems that need attention, solutions that exist (or are introduced) whether or not a matching problem has been identified, participants whose attention drifts between choice opportunities, and choice opportunities where decisions could be made.

In a rational model, a problem surfaces, participants gather, solutions are evaluated, and a decision is made. In the garbage can model, these streams collide inside choice opportunities with no guarantee that the problem in the room matches the solution being offered, or that the participants present are the ones who understand either problem or solution. The streams meet inside the garbage can.

Three Ways a Decision Gets Made

The model identifies three styles of decision-making, only one of which involves actually solving the problem at hand.

Deliberation occurs when a problem attaches to a choice opportunity, sufficient energy accumulates, and the problem is genuinely resolved. This is what organisations believe happens most of the time. The garbage can model suggests it is the exception.

Oversight occurs when a choice opportunity resolves with no problem attached. The meeting happened, the budget was approved, the decision was recorded. But the underlying problem was elsewhere, unaddressed and largely misunderstood. The organisation produced a decision without producing a resolution.

Flight occurs when problems leave a choice opportunity before it resolves. The issue was raised, discussed, and then abandoned as participants moved on to other choice opportunities. The problem did not get solved. It migrated.

Why This Matters

Most organisations operate as if decisions are made rationally: a problem is identified and defined, options are weighed, and a choice is made. Operating models, governance structures, reporting lines, and capital allocation processes are often built on this rationality assumption. The Garbage Can Model shows what happens when that assumption is wrong.

In high-pressure organisations, problems outnumber the system's capacity to resolve them. Choice opportunities close without addressing the issues that were raised. Problems migrate between meetings, reviews, and committees, never finding a stable place to be resolved. The organisation keeps producing decisions, while many problems remain unresolved.

The gap between the decisions being made and the problems being experienced is not a failure of allocation, communication or competence, but a structural property of the system.

Explore the Model

This module offers four ways to engage with the Garbage Can Model:

Taxonomy The five organisation types and how they are classified Explore Run the model with any parameter combination Assess Answer twelve questions and see your organisation modelled What's a Garbage Can? See the three streams collide in one choice opportunity

References

Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.