The study of decision making models, especially when the decision involves or effects a group is fascinating. It is very interesting to study the varied ways we come to validate decisions. One of the things I notice in making partisan based political decisions is that we often allow the powerful group to make decisions for all, while leaving the door open for a back draft from a weaker group, one who has not agreed that the decision making game is over. This is probably the most over looked problem we have in the current political climate.
Decision making for beginners...
=============================================
Decision making in groups
Decision making in groups is sometimes examined separately as process and outcome. Process refers to the interactions among individuals that lead to the choice of a particular course of action. An outcome is the consequence of that choice. Separating process and outcome is convenient because it helps explain that a good decision making processes does not guarantee a good outcome, and that a good outcome does not presuppose a good process. Thus, for example, managers interested in good decision making are encouraged to put good decision making processes in place. Although these good decision making processes do not guarantee good outcomes, they can tip the balance of chance in favor of good outcomes.
A critical aspect for decision making groups is the ability to converge on a choice.
Politics is one approach to making decisions in groups. This process revolves around the relative power or ability to influence of the individuals in the group. Some relevant ideas include coalitions among participants as well as influence and persuasion. The use of politics is often judged negatively, but it is a useful way to approach problems when preferences among actors are in conflict, when dependencies exist that cannot be avoided, when there are no super-ordinate authorities, and when the technical or scientific merit of the options is ambiguous.
In addition to the different processes involved in making decisions, groups can also have different decision rules. A decision rule is the approach used by a group to mark the choice that is made.
Unanimity is commonly used by juries in criminal trials in the United States. Unanimity requires everyone to agree on a given course of action, and thus imposes a high bar for action.
Majority requires support from more than 50% of the members of the group. Thus, the bar for action is lower than with unanimity and a group of "losers" is implicit to this rule.
Consensus decision-making tries to avoid "winners" and "losers". Consensus requires that a majority approve a given course of action, but that the minority agree to go along with the course of action. In other words, if the minority opposes the course of action, consensus requires that the course of action be modified to remove objectionable features.
Gathering involves all participants acknowledging each other's needs and opinions and tends towards a problem solving approach in which as many needs and opinions as possible can be satisfied. It allows for multiple outcomes and does not require agreement from some for others to act.
Sub-committee involves assigning responsibility for evaluation of a decision to a sub-set of a larger group, which then comes back to the larger group with recommendations for action. Using a sub-committee is more common in larger governance groups, such as a legislature. Sometimes a sub-committee includes those individuals most affected by a decision, although at other times it is useful for the larger group to have a sub-committee that involves more neutral participants.
Less desirable group decision rules are:
Plurality, where the largest block in a group decides, even if it falls short of a majority.
Dictatorship, where one individual determines the course of action.
see also: groupthink
Plurality and dictatorship are less desirable as decision rules because they do not require the involvement of the broader group to determine a choice. Thus, they do not engender commitment to the course of action chosen. An absence of commitment from individuals in the group can be problematic during the implementation phase of a decision.
There are no perfect decision making rules. Depending on how the rules are implemented in practice and the situation, all of these can lead to situations where either no decision is made, or to situations where decisions made are inconsistent with one another over time.
Principles
The ethical principles of decision making vary considerably. Some common choices of principles and the methods which seem to match them include:
. the most powerful person/group decides
method: dictatorship or oligarchy
. everyone participates in a certain class of meta-decisions
method: parliamentary democracy
. everyone participates in every decision
direct democracy, consensus decision making
There are many grades of decision making which have an element of participation. A common example is that of institutions making decisions which affect those they are charged to provide for. In such cases an understanding of what participation is, is crucial to understand the process and the power structures at play.
en.wikipedia.org |
