Models of Decision-Making & Alternative Approaches Diplomacy

Models of Decision-Making & Alternative Approaches Diplomacy—Building On the Basics
Name
Course
Instructor
Date
* Policymaking Models
* The rational actor model
The model assumes that the decision-maker is an individual who can be relied upon to make calculated and informed decisions. The central assumption here is that the decision-maker has complete information. As a result, the choice is optimized so that the action taken is consistent. The step-by-step approach to decision-making is critical in arriving at the optimal decision. It breaks down complex issues into simple steps, making it easier to arrive at the final decision. However, the model fails to account for instances when complete information is not available.[Mintz, Alex, and AmnonSofrin. "Decision Making Theories in Foreign Policy Analysis." In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. 2017.] [MacDonald, Paul K. "Useful fiction or miracle maker: The competing epistemological foundations of rational choice theory." American Political Science Review 97, no. 4 (2003): 551-565.]
* The bureaucratic policy model
Whereas the rational actor model sees the state as a unitary actor, the bureaucratic model considers the state of being a composition of independent and competitive entities. The parties involved do not have equal powers in the process. Some are more influential than others, which gives them a vantage position in the process. U.S. politics have, over the years, become partisan, in which individuals align themselves in different groups.[Mintz, Alex, and Karl DeRouen Jr. Understanding foreign policy decision making. Cambridge University Press, 2010.]
The advantage of this model comes from the involvement of the different players. The participation of different actors ensures that the final decision comes as a result of consensus as opposed to having an individual deciding on an issue. The risk with the approach is the influence that some actors may exert in the process. This may lead to rationality in the ultimate decision.
* The small group decision-making model
Small groups are critical in the foreign policy decision-making process. Small groups make a majority of the high-level decisions, especially during a crisis. In such a situation, a leader should be in a position to sit down with peers in a table and engage in a candid debate about possible policy options available. For instance, during 9/11, President Bush did not have the time to follow tedious procedures. Instead, with a few cabinet members and other key executives, President Bush was able to make key decisions regarding how to tackle the terror attack.[Hudson, V. M., & Day, B. S. (2019). Foreign policy analysis: classic and contemporary theory. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.]
The advantage of the model is the ability to speed up the decision-making process. During a crisis, for instance, the government may not be in a position to tackle the broader issue using other lengthy decision-making processes. Instead, such a task is delegated to a smaller group. The risk with this approach is how it limits the ability of individuals to act. The involvement of a smaller number of individuals in the making of major decisions overloo...