Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lecture No. 16 Foreign Policy, Models of Decision Making, and Domestic Influence
Lecture No. 16 Foreign Policy, Models of Decision Making, and Domestic Influence
POLICY
Rational Model
Organizational Process Model
Government Bargaining Model
Definition Rational model
“A model in which decision makers calculate the costs and benefits of each
possible course of action, then choose the one with the highest benefits and
lowest costs”.(Joshua.P.123)
The process of rational model is as under given below.
• Clarify your goals in the situation
• Order them by importance
• List the alternatives for achieving your goals
• Investigate the consequences of each alternative
• Choose the alternative that best achieves your goals
The Policy makers attach Probabilities
alternative’s
choice may be
complicated • Peace Talks
by Two
Possibilities
of pressuring
• Backfire
“A decision making model in which policy makers or lower level officials rely
largely on standardized responses or standard operation procedures”.
(Joshua.P.124)
• The process of organizational process model is as under given below.
• Goals are not identified
• Alternative actions are not searched
• SOPs are drafted
• Handled by low level decision makers
• General principles are applied
Government Bargaining Model
Bureaucratic Politics Model
“ A model that sees foreign policy decisions as flowing from
bargaining process among various government agencies that have
somewhat divergent interests in the outcome”. (Joshua.P.124)
• The process of government bargaining model is as under given
below.
• Result from bargaining process
• It reflects the interest of states
• Reflects interest of state agencies
For Exp. Japan & California (US); agriculture Vs. foreign ministry
Individual
decision
President Harry Truman, “The Buck
makers: stops here.”
Idiosyncrasies Individual decisions reflect the values
a behavioral and beliefs of the decision maker.
attribute that is
distinctive and
peculiar to an
individual
Bill Clinton drew much criticism in
his early years as president for a
foreign policy that seemed to
Idiosyncrasy zigzag.
is affected by B/Z of Early Childhood Experience
made him peacemaker.
Psychoanalytic
Approaches
Individual
decision
making
diverge from First. Misperception
rational Second. Affective bias
model
Third. Cognitive bias
1. Misperceptions Filtrations is often
biased
and Selective
Information Screens are
Perceptions subconscious or
In 1988, US attacked unconscious
Iran’s Civilian jet as Ignore any Information
military jet that doesn’t fit their
expectations.
2. Affective Bias In rational decision
Positive and Negative making, positive
Affect refer to the information about the
feeling of liking or disliked people, and
disliking someone. negative information about
liked people is screened out
3. Cognitive We try to produce cognitive
balance, and reduce cognitive
Biases
dissonance…we do
Emotional Feeling, but 1. Justification of Effort: politician don’t admit
failures
Limitations of Human 2. Wishful Thinking: expect probability of desire
outcomes
brain in making 3. Low Probability--- will not occur
1. Bounded Reality
2. Prospects Theory
We do two things
Bounded • Optimizing: Picking up very best
option
• Satisficing: finding a satisfactory
Rationalities solution
We do two things
Prospect • Editing Phase: frame options with
probabilities
• Evaluation Phase: Assess the
Theory options and chose one
Next Day
Continue…
• Advisors or legislative committees
Group: may force a state leader to
Psychological reconsider a rash decision.
B
Over Optimistic, take risk, and everyone think idea will work.
Some of
the
problems
of
individual
and group
psychology
in the
policy
process is
illustrated
in figure
4.3
Experienced participants in
foreign policy formation are
familiar with the techniques for
manipulating decision making
processes to favor outcomes they
prefer.
The Structure of a Decision Making
Process
1. VENUE
2. AGENDA
3. MANIPULATION BY EXPERTS
4. VOTING
5. MINUTES
Inner Circle of Advisors
1. PRESIDENT JOHNSON: TUESDAY
LUNCHES
Interest
interest in the outcome of some political issue
complex (Joshua.p.135)