In 1971 a man named Graham Allison wrote a book entitled Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis
In this book he goes into detail about the three different lenses in which administrations see and make decisions through:
1: The Rational Actor Model.
This model follows the assumptions of game theorists. and how rational self interest can inherently lead to suboptimal outcomes. The quintessential example of this line of reasoning is the example of the prisoners dilemma;
In the prisoners dilemma example two accused people are being questioned for a crime if they both cooperate with each other and don't say anything they get 1 year in prison each. If they both say it was the other person they get 10 years in prison each. But if player 1 says that player 2 committed the crime or vice versa and the other person says nothing the person that says nothing goes to prison for 30 years while the player that accused goes free. The best rational model in this situation does not have the best outcome both players going to prison for 10 years is the nash equilibrium in this instance.
The payoffs are different but it's basically this model here:
The general assumption in game theory is that each player will look for the best possible outcome to a situation for their own personal benefit.
2: The Organizational Process Model.
In the organizational process model it is assumed that decisions are made to follow pre-determined procedures and be guided by said procedures/policies/guidelines and unwritten "ways of doing things" basically the organization takes it's picks out of a predetermined set of options and decides which set of rules it's going to operate on. The analogy would be any sports strategies. There are many pre-written (american) football plays but they must still remain in the parameters of the games rules overall. In this example the administration would be the quarterback, playing a predetermined action but with subtle differences in the way it is carried out, all the while remaining true to that "play."
3: The Governmental Politics Model.
The third model is defined by "you stand where you sit" (Allison has gotten much criticism for pointing this out but most of the time it is true.) The argument is that the people in a certain position of hierarchal politics make predictable decisions on the basis of what branch they represent. and that the outcomes of decisions are simply a compromise between the decisions of each of these branches. Policy is usually negotiated and created as a compromise in these types of situations. When different people see different faces of an issue these issues are bound to not come together unilaterally on one front but rather become a bargaining of sorts.
Allison's point was to make us aware that we need to step back and look at an issue through each one of these lenses to get a better understanding of what is truly going on.
I think these are important things for this forum to think about at this time, and I'm very curious as to know the rest of your opinions on Allison's models.
I have my own opinions on them but I will keep them to myself until I've heard others thoughts as to not taint free flow of discussion on these points.
In this book he goes into detail about the three different lenses in which administrations see and make decisions through:
1: The Rational Actor Model.
This model follows the assumptions of game theorists. and how rational self interest can inherently lead to suboptimal outcomes. The quintessential example of this line of reasoning is the example of the prisoners dilemma;
In the prisoners dilemma example two accused people are being questioned for a crime if they both cooperate with each other and don't say anything they get 1 year in prison each. If they both say it was the other person they get 10 years in prison each. But if player 1 says that player 2 committed the crime or vice versa and the other person says nothing the person that says nothing goes to prison for 30 years while the player that accused goes free. The best rational model in this situation does not have the best outcome both players going to prison for 10 years is the nash equilibrium in this instance.
The payoffs are different but it's basically this model here:
The general assumption in game theory is that each player will look for the best possible outcome to a situation for their own personal benefit.
2: The Organizational Process Model.
In the organizational process model it is assumed that decisions are made to follow pre-determined procedures and be guided by said procedures/policies/guidelines and unwritten "ways of doing things" basically the organization takes it's picks out of a predetermined set of options and decides which set of rules it's going to operate on. The analogy would be any sports strategies. There are many pre-written (american) football plays but they must still remain in the parameters of the games rules overall. In this example the administration would be the quarterback, playing a predetermined action but with subtle differences in the way it is carried out, all the while remaining true to that "play."
3: The Governmental Politics Model.
The third model is defined by "you stand where you sit" (Allison has gotten much criticism for pointing this out but most of the time it is true.) The argument is that the people in a certain position of hierarchal politics make predictable decisions on the basis of what branch they represent. and that the outcomes of decisions are simply a compromise between the decisions of each of these branches. Policy is usually negotiated and created as a compromise in these types of situations. When different people see different faces of an issue these issues are bound to not come together unilaterally on one front but rather become a bargaining of sorts.
Allison's point was to make us aware that we need to step back and look at an issue through each one of these lenses to get a better understanding of what is truly going on.
I think these are important things for this forum to think about at this time, and I'm very curious as to know the rest of your opinions on Allison's models.
I have my own opinions on them but I will keep them to myself until I've heard others thoughts as to not taint free flow of discussion on these points.
