The Polythink Syndrome and Elite Group Decision-Making
In: Political Psychology 37(S1):3-21, 2016
In: Political Psychology 37(S1):3-21, 2016
SSRN
Working paper
In: Political psychology: journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, Band 37, Heft S1, S. 3-21
ISSN: 1467-9221
How do presidents and their advisors make war and peace decisions on military intervention, escalation, deescalation, and termination of conflicts? How do groups make decisions? Why do they often make suboptimal decisions or appear to be frozen in inaction? The leading concept of group dynamics, Groupthink, offers one explanation: cohesive policymaking groups, such as advisors to the president, often make suboptimal decisions due to their desire for uniformity over dissent, while ignoring important limitations of chosen policies, overestimating the odds for success and failing to consider other relevant policy options or possibilities. But groups, including presidential advisory teams, are often fragmented and divisive. We thus introduce Polythink, a group decision‐making dynamic whereby different members in a decision‐making unit espouse a plurality of opinions and offer divergent policy prescriptions, which can result in intragroup conflict, a disjointed decision‐making process, and decision paralysis as each group member pushes for his or her preferred policy action. This phenomenon is no less problematic or common than Groupthink and explains how otherwise smart, experienced decision‐makers can engage in flawed decision‐making processes that deeply affect the security and welfare of a country. By shining a light on Polythink's symptoms and consequences, and on the factors that lead to Polythink, we seek to offer actionable policy prescriptions for elite decision‐makers to offset the negative attributes of this phenomenon and engage in more optimal policymaking processes. Furthermore, we explain how leaders and other decision‐makers (e.g., in business) can transform Destructive Polythink into Productive Polythink, illuminating the potential ways in which this group dynamic may be effectively directed towards sound decisions.
SSRN
Working paper
In: Political psychology: journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, Band 37, Heft S1, S. 3-21
ISSN: 0162-895X
In: Parliamentary affairs: a journal of comparative politics, Band 76, Heft 1, S. 211-231
ISSN: 1460-2482
AbstractThe Chilcot report set out in detail its finding that the Blair Government had been prone to groupthink in its decision-making processes when leading Britain into the Iraq War. Subsequent British prime ministers have been in no hurry to change their style of governing in ways that might broaden decision-making circles and introduce the 'challenge' that Chilcot said had been lacking. This article draws on the literature on the psychology of group decision-making to examine the extent to which groupthink remains embedded in the processes of cabinet government in the UK. The article argues that the strongest driver of groupthink is the psychological disposition towards conflict of individual prime ministers. Drawing on interviews with ministers, civil servants and special advisers we suggest that the political authority of the prime minister interacts with their psychological predisposition towards debate to encourage groupthink, polythink or a more positive style of 'vigilant' decision-making.
In: European review of international studies: eris, Band 5, Heft 1, S. 48-66
ISSN: 2196-7415
Numerous studies on decision making in the Yom Kippur War of 1973 claim that a groupthink syndrome led to the faulty assessment and processing of information prior to the Yom Kippur War.
In: The Polythink Syndrome, Stanford University, 2016
SSRN
Working paper
Intro -- Table of Contents -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- Chapter 1 - The Polythink Syndrome -- Chapter 2 - Symptoms, Causes, and Consequences of Polythink -- Chapter 3 - The 9/11 Attacks: Polythink in National Security -- Chapter 4 - Polythink and Afghanistan War Decisions: War Initiation and Termination -- Chapter 5 - Decision Making in the Iraq War: From Groupthink to Polythink -- Chapter 6 - Polythink in the Iranian Nuclear Dispute: Decisions of the U.S. and Israel -- Chapter 7 - Recent Challenges: The Syria Debate, the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Negotiations, and the ISIS Decision -- Chapter 8 - The Global Nature of Polythink and Its Productive Potential -- Notes -- References -- Index.
In: Political science quarterly: a nonpartisan journal devoted to the study and analysis of government, politics and international affairs ; PSQ, Band 132, Heft 1, S. 186-187
ISSN: 1538-165X
In: Politics, culture and socialization: PCS, Band 7, Heft 1-2, S. 199-203
ISSN: 2196-1417
In: Perspectives on politics, Band 15, Heft 1, S. 299-300
ISSN: 1541-0986
In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
"Advice, Decision Making, and Leadership in Security Crises" published on by Oxford University Press.
In: In: The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology Edited by Danny Osborne and Chris Sibley Cambridge University Press 2021
SSRN
In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
"Decision Making Theories in Foreign Policy Analysis" published on by Oxford University Press.
In: Policy studies journal: the journal of the Policy Studies Organization, Band 41, Heft Supplement 1
ISSN: 1541-0072
This article reviews major decision-making models with an emphasis on basic theoretical perspectives as well as on how these models explain foreign policy decision making and national and international security decisions. Furthermore, we examine how these models have been utilized in explanations of various international crises. Specifically, for each model, we present examples drawn from the literature on applications of the respective model to foreign policy and national security decisions. The theories we have reviewed are as follows: rational choice, cybernetic model, prospect theory, poliheuristic theory, organizational and bureaucratic politics, groupthink and polythink, and analogical reasoning. We also review the Applied Decision Analysis method, and the concept of biases in decision making. Adapted from the source document.