An Explorative Analysis of the Cybernetic Theory of Decision Making

Steinbruner postulates that cybernetic theory of decision making is a new exploration in the theoretical perspective on the process of decision making in the government. The author suggests that cybernetic theory is developed in various fields such as information theory, behavioral psychology and mathematical logic but fails to factor in the dimensions of decision making with regard to communication, chains of command and intelligence structures. Thus, this theory generates a systematic and non- rational analysis that seeks to explain how natural decision making process puzzles many decision makers. The combination of the basic understanding of human mental operation in both behavioral psychology and cybernetic theory of decision making, shows a striking map of how decision makers deal with the intense uncertainty and the fundamental conflict of value that are eminent in bureaucratic politics. This paper seeks to critically analyze Steinbruner book Cybernetics Theory of Decision Making showing the application of the theory to a place of work.

Overview of the Theory
Cybernetics Theory of Decision Making by Steinbruner is a stimulating as well as a challenging work that applies both psychology and cybernetics to the politics of multilateral nuclear force as well as the sharing nuclear issues. Accordingly, the argument by Steinbruner presents an important and creative study by adding a new understanding to the question of decision making. Reconstructing the logic of Steinbruner theory distinguishes the system of both cybernetics and cognitive paradigms. The author explains that the application of the cognitive psychology to decision making in an organizational situation, has a special role in the entire question of foreign policy.

Analysis of Cybernetic Theory of Decision Making
Strengths of the Theory
The cybernetics and cognitive paradigm which is composite of this theory have a special relationship. Essentially, the cognitive paradigm is used to imply cybernetic assumptions supplemented by cognitive and the cybernetic models to mean a more restricted set of principles, which both the cybernetic and cognitive paradigms share in common. Particularly, cybernetic theory of decision making resides on the assumption that the objectives of the decision maker is to accomplish an action with reference to the environment.

As presented by Steinbruner, cybernetic theory of decision making is composite of the decision makers basic motivating value, where survival is directly related in the internal state of the decision making mechanism. Similarly, the theory involves the central attitudinal focus of the decision maker such that finding optimal solution under given constraints is encouraged within the principle of eliminating the variety of complexities inherent in any decision making problem.

Moreover, Steinbruner maintains that the Vis Motiva of decision making in the cybernetic model is conservative, simple and purposeful. Significantly, it is not necessarily quiescent but animated by a criterion of survival. The process of decision making under this theory enjoys the effectiveness of the purpose with respect to a system as well as a generation of purpose by a system. The role of body machine in the actualization of decision making is realized and accordingly, the primary concern of the decision maker is to avoid situations that may overwhelm them by a variety of the environments. In order to control the uncertainty which is a resultant of the so said variety, the decision maker simply avoids calculations of direct outcomes. With regard to this, complex problems are factored, dissected and segmented a procedure that disaggregates value and utilizes information selectively (Steinbruner, 2002).

Steinbruner in his theory provides a multiple criteria for decision making problems with complete patterning where decision makers are caught up with time, pressure, lack of knowledge or data as well as their limited expertise related with the problem domain. The theory is stable and simple because, in light of cognitive inference mechanism work to essentially keep the structures of beliefs as simple ass possible.

Steinbrenners theory thus culminates in the delineation of three non-idiosyncratic and coherent thought patterns which he ultimately derives from the cognitive principles and incorporates it in to the organizational decision process. Accordingly, Steinbruner calls these differences the most direct and immediately usable contribution of the cognitive theory to the analysis of complex policy problems. As a result, his own application of this theory to a case study proved less successful.

Weaknesses of the Theory
It is significant to point out that although this theory proposes the fundamental three dimension of decision making process, it fails to recognize that the art of decision making in the contemporary society area that includes the use of technology but should not preclude managerial input for decision support. Primarily, the theory of cybernetics in decision making provides a guideline for political administration, but it does not offer a pedestal of the chain of command in military, aspects of control, communication as well as structures of intelligence as relevant to decision making.

In addition, the theory of cybernetics does not compare its rationale to the corresponding civilian framework and thus, Steinbruner falls of short of incorporating all fundamental elements necessary in a decision making process. He instead dwelt on the technological support in decision making established among middle level decision makers. Comparatively, Steinbrenners theory deprives of the top level managers an opportunity to extensively enjoy from systematic decision making because, intuition, good guesses and aspects of creativity are inhibited in the whole process. In light of this, the decision making process are based on the fundamental.

Furthermore, it is plausible to underscore that the implications of this theory on decision making process does not clearly results in behavioral dimension on knowledge engineering. However it is vital to note that the behavioral knowledge and its performance orientation fundamentally determine how human expert knowledge should be guided in such a process. On the other hand, the principles of inconsistency management, which Steinbruner pay closes attention to, resist change in the core structures of belief.

Cybernetic Theory of Decision Making ignores one method of inconsistency management. It imperative that decision maker in the cybernetic theory monitors only a few of the incoming channels or variables. With regard to this, Steinbruner ignores to suggest that a decision maker may resolve an inconsistency by altering the channels being monitored.

Application of Cybernetic Theory of Decision Making
In an application of cybernetic theory of decision making in an organization had far reaching implications. Workplace logic out rightly signifies the attitude that employees express in close interaction, collaborative interventions and formal decision making process. The theory portend a metaphorical mental rather than a coherent and logical understanding of the social mechanism that influences the decision making and other cooperative activities. Steinbruners theory worked well in organizations that relate to future oriented choices that employees make so as to obtain targeted production goals.

In addition, the theory became applicable in the nursing where, in the event of wanting  to create a favorable impression with others as the basic part of human nature both in work and personal life. Accordingly, this theory provides a guide to the succinct use of impression management with particular attention to the impressions that the entire organization make. Accordingly, labor is defined and the authority responsibility is made official thus decisions on division of labor are succinctly explained.

Conclusion
Cybernetic Theory of Decision Making is a new approach in decision making processes in government process. It is a theory developed in diverse field of information, logic and psychology and presents a striking picture of how decision makers deal with uncertainties in the entire conflict of bureaucratic processes. Steinbruner illustrates the advantages of using cybernetic theory by analyzing the issues of sharing nuclear weapons among the allies of NATO. Cybernetic paradigms in other words imply fundamental different learning processes from the analytical model.

0 comments:

Post a Comment