			Home About us Contact

Decision-making Mechanism (decision-making + mechanism)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Humanities and Social Sciences	50%
Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting	50%

Selected Abstracts

Voters, Parties, and the Endogenous Size of Government

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIOLOGY, Issue 1 2002
Jans-Peter Olters
Elections, often to a considerable degree, influence the fiscal policies of governments installed on the basis of their results. Yet, economists have tended to view politicians' behaviour either as being determined exogenously or as the result of a social planner's maximisation of a well-defined social-welfare function (subject to some appropriate technology and resource constraints). The latter approach, given (i) its inherent abstraction from important politico-economic interactions, (ii) the theoretical difficulty in deriving a non-contradictory "collective utility function" (as demonstrated by Arrow), and (iii) the inability to estimate a stable relationship that could explain political preferences with economic variables,is viewed as being an unsatisfactory tool for the joint description of a country's economy and polity. On the basis of explicit micro-economic foundations and a democratically coordinated decision-making mechanism over the "optimal" provision of public goods and the corresponding taxes required to finance them, this paper will introduce a simple economic model of politics that subjects individuals to a,two-tiered,political decision-making process over party membership and electoral participation, thereby endogenising the evolution of the competing parties' ideologies, households' electoral behaviour, and the key factors explaining the design of fiscal policies. Having the majority party's median delegate determine on the "optimal" degree of income redistribution suggests that a country's wealth distribution is a crucial explanatory variable explaining its politico-economic development path. [source]

Unraveling the Logic of ASEAN's Decision-Making: Theoretical Analysis and Case Examination

ASIAN POLITICS AND POLICY, Issue 3 2010
Yi-hung Chiou
Throughout its history, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has based decisions on consensus and consultation, producing a loosely defined, weak regional organization. The results of nonbinding and watered-down resolutions make substantial progress for ASEAN difficult. This article explores the logic of ASEAN's decision-making by applying rational choice theory. It argues that the characteristics of ASEAN's decision-making mechanism allow member states to base their actions on how individual nations perceive their interests to be best served by group resolutions. By constructing a series of hypotheses to pattern ASEAN's decision-making, this article examines four cases and how players resolved each. The findings suggest that the constraints of group decision-making and divergent interests between member states play a major role in shaping the effectiveness of resolutions. [source]

Emotion as a tradeable quantity

JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, Issue 1 2009
Aaron A. Reid
Abstract Three studies investigate how physiological emotional responses can be combined with symbolic information to predict preferences. The first study used a weighted proportional difference rule to combine explicitly quantified symbolic and emotional information. The proportion of emotion model was more predictive than a simple additive emotional (AE) combination in decisions about selecting dating partners. Study 2 showed that a simple proportion algorithm of emotionally derived weights and a simple AE model predicted preference equally well for decisions between equal expected value (EV) gambles. Study 3 provided additional evidence for decision mechanisms that combine physiological measures within symbolic trade-off algorithms for choices between diamond rings. Self-reported emotion measures proved to be better predictors than physiological measures. The results are discussed in the context of other major models of emotional influence on preference and provide a foundation for future research on emotional decision-making mechanisms. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Major Innovation as a Dynamic Capability: A Systems Approach,

THE JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, Issue 4 2008
Gina Colarelli O'Connor
Major innovation (MI), composed of both radical and really new innovation, is an important mechanism for enabling the growth and renewal of an enterprise. Yet it is poorly managed in most established firms, and success stories are rare. This conceptual article draws on systems theory, recent advances in dynamic capabilities theory, and the management of innovation literature to offer a framework for building an MI dynamic capability. The framework is composed of seven elements that together form a management system rather than a process-based approach to nurturing radical innovation. These system elements are (1) an identifiable organization structure; (2) interface mechanisms with the mainstream organization, some of which are tightly coupled and others of which are loose; (3) exploratory processes; (4) requisite skills and talent development, given that entrepreneurial talent is not present in most organizations; (5) governance and decision-making mechanisms at the project, MI portfolio, and MI system levels; (6) appropriate performance metrics; and (7) an appropriate culture and leadership context. It is argued that dynamic capabilities for phenomena as complex as MI must be considered in a systems fashion rather than as operating routines and repeatable processes as the literature currently suggests. A set of propositions is offered regarding how each element should play out in this parallel management system. Finally, each element's role in the major innovation system is justified in terms of four criteria required by systems theory: (1) The system is identifiable, and its elements are interdependent; (2) the effect of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts; (3) homeostasis is achieved through interaction and networking with the larger organization; and (4) there is a clear purpose in the larger system in which the MI management system is embedded. Examples are given to demonstrate these criteria. Systems theory offers a new way of thinking about dynamic capability development and management. [source]