Amitai Etzioni

Mixed-Scanning: A 'Third' Approach to Decision-Making

In the concept of social decision-making, vague commitments of a normative and political nature are translated into specific commitments to one or more specific courses of action. Since decision-making includes an element of choice, it is the most deliberate and voluntaristic aspect of social conduct. As such, it raises the question: To what extent can social actors decide what their course will be, and to what extent are they compelled to follow a course set by forces beyond their control? Three conceptions of decision-making are considered here with assumptions that give varying weights to the conscious choice of the decision-makers. Rationalistic models tend to posit a high degree of control over the decision-making situation on the part of the decision-maker. The incrementalist approach presents an alternative model, referred to as the art of “muddling through,” which assumes much less command over the environment. Finally, the article outlines a third approach to social decision-making which, in combining elements of both earlier approaches, is neither as utopian in its assumptions as the first model nor as conservative as the second. For reasons which will become evident, this third approach is referred to as mixed-scanning.

A comparative analysis of complex organizations : on power, involvement, and their correlates

CONTENTS = ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii INTRODUCTION xi I. Compliance as a Comparative Base 3 II. An Analytical Classification: Coercive and Utilitarian Organizations 23 III. An Analytical Classification: Normative and Dual Organizations 40 IV. Compliance, Goals, and Effectiveness 71 V. Compliance and Organizational Elites 89 VI. Compliance and Cultural Integration: Consensus, Communication, and Socialization 127 VII. Compliance and Organizational Environment: Recruitment, Scope, and Pervasiveness 151 VIII. Compliance and Cohesion 175

Two Approaches to Organizational Analysis: A Critique and A Suggestion

The often-used goal model for measuring effectiveness is criticized. A system model is suggested and its advantages over the goal model specified. Mainly, the system model is theoretically more powerful and avoids certain value judgments. Two system models are compared: an often-used survival model and a rarely applied effectiveness model. The impact of either one on social action is briefly outlined.

Normative-affective factors: Toward a new decision-making model

The author outlines a radically different decision-making model form the one widely used in Economics and in Psychology. Accordingly, most choices are made on the basis of emotional involvements and value commitments. Information processing is often excluded. In other areas of choices, emotions and values allow for some subsets of options to be rationally considered but ‘color’ them and/or short cut the deliberations. In a still other subset emotion/values require rational decision-making. Emotions and values are not necessarily disruptive; they have positive functions. Cognitivists’ objections to the concept of emotions are responded to. Problems of operationalization are raised. The question, if the concepts of emotions and values can be incorporated into the neoclassical paradigm, is explored.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP, ADAPTATION AND LEGITIMATION A Macro-behavioral Perspective*

Societal patterns often lag behind the constantly changing environment. Entrepreneurs, by seeking new ways of doing business, enhance societal adaptation towards the changing environment. This process of destroying old patterns and replacing them with new ones is usually not revolutionary, but instead involves the accumulation of numerous small adjustments. Entrepreneurship is thus studied as a societal function, not individual attributes. The degree of change entrepreneurs bring about in any particular society reflects the extent which entrepreneurship is legitimated in that society.

The Case for a Multiple-Utility Conception

In recent decades, neoclassical economists have made heroic efforts to accommodate within the confines of the concept of rational utility maximization the fact that individual behavior is significantly affected by moral considerations. This article argues the merits of using an alternative approach: recognizing that individuals pursue at least two irreducible sources of value or “utility�?, pleasure and morality. The possibility that some additional utilities may have to be recognized is explored. This raises the concern that conceptual anarchy will break out, which in turn will force a search for a common denominator, and thus a return to one overarching utility. Arguments are presented to show that this concern is unfounded. The main focus of the article is a criticism of the monoutility conception and a brief for separating the sense of discharging one’s moral obligations from all satisfactions. The article first deals with general conceptual points, and then cites both everyday observations and empirical evidence in support of this position.

Political unification : a comparative study of leaders and forces

CONTENTS Foreword William T. R. Fox, Director, Institute of War and Peace Studies, Columbia University vii Preface ix Introduction xvii Part One. A PARADIGM FOR THE STUDY OF POLITICAL UNIFICATION Chapter 1 - Delineation of the Subject and of Elementary Concepts 3 Chapter 2 Political Unification 14 THE PREUNIFICATION STATE 16 THE UNIFICATION PROCESS: A. INTEGRATING POWER 37 THE UNIFICATION PROCESS: B. INTEGRATED SECTORS 51 TERMINATION STATE 60 Part Two. DISTRIBUTION AND CONFIGURATION OF INTEGRATING POWERS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS INTEGRATING POWER: EFFECTIVE DISTRIBUTIONS 68 INTEGRATING POWER: EFFECTIVE COMPOSITIONS 71

The Kennedy Experiment

The patter of events between June 10 and November 22,1963, provided a partial test of a theory of international relations. The essence of the theory is that psychological gestures initiated by one nation will be reciprocated by others with the effect of reducing international tensions. This tension reduction, in turn, will lessen the probability of international conflicts and wars. Examining this theory in light of the 1963 experiment, I ask: (a) What are the main propositions of the theory? (b) What initiatives were actually taken by the United States in the experiment period, and how did the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics react? (c) What were the effects of these initiatives and responses on inter-bloc relations, and to what degree did these effects conform to the expectations of the theory? (d) What other factors, not accounted for by the theory, could have produced all or part of these effects? (e) What factors limited both the scope and the extent of the experiment, and under what conditions could it be replicated or extended?

Mixed-Scanning Revisited

An article on mixed-scanning as a “third” approach to decision-making, published in the Public Administration Review (December, 1967) which was awarded the William Mosher Award, generated a steady stream of discussion, criticisms, and applications but very little empirical research. The approach was developed in contrast to rationalist models of decision-making and to incrementalism. Rationalist approaches were held to be Utopian because actors cannot command the resources and capabilities rationalist decision making requires. Incrementalism was shown to overlook opportunities for significant innovations and to ignore the empirical fact that incremental decisions are often, in effect, made within the context of fundamental decisions. For example, once the U.S. embraced the Truman Doctrine after World War II, and decided to contain the USSR (rather than either allow it to expand or for the U.S. to attempt to free countries within the Soviet Bloc), numerous incremental decisions were made in Greece, Turkey, and Iran. However, these were implemented and guided by the fundamental context-setting decision, and cannot be properly understood without taking into account the basic decision.

The Evils of Self-Determination

The author argues that self-determination, long lauded as an essential tool used to cast off the chains of empire and build responsive, democratic societies, now serves to undermine democracy by encouraging ethnic fragmentation. Recognizing that every ethnic group cannot feasibly have its own nation-state, the author encourages the incorporation of many ethnic groups into governments and allows for the necessity of according such groups different levels of autonomy. Pluralism’s moderating effect on political leadership and public policy is enhanced in diverse societies that embrace rather than shun different ethnic groups. The author recommends that the United States and the international community stop lending its moral support to movements for ethnic self-determination.