Decision Rules and Levels

Decision Rules

· Unanimity is commonly used by juries in criminal trials in the United States. Unanimity requires everyone to agree on a given course of action, and thus imposes a high bar for action.

· Majority requires support from more than 50% of the members of the group. Thus, the bar for action is lower than with unanimity, but it can create a group of "losers" in the process.

· Consensus decision-making tries to avoid "winners" and "losers".

Consensus requires that a majority approve a given course of action, but that the minority agree to go along with the course of action. In other words, if the minority opposes the course of action, consensus requires that the course of action be modified to remove objectionable features.

· Sub-committee involves assigning responsibility for evaluation of a decision to a sub-set of a larger group, which then comes back to the larger group with recommendations for action. Using a sub-committee is more common in larger governance groups, such as a legislature. Sometimes a sub-committee includes those individuals most affected by a decision, although at other times it is useful for the larger group to have a sub-committee that involves more neutral participants.

Less desirable group decision rules are:

Plurality, where the largest block in a group decides, even if it falls short of a majority.
Dictatorship, where one individual determines the course of action.

Plurality and dictatorship are less desirable as decision rules because they do not require the involvement of the broader group to determine a choice. Thus, they do not engender commitment to the course of action chosen. An absence of commitment from individuals in the group can be problematic during the implementation phase of a decision.

There are no perfect decision making rules. Depending on how the rules are implemented in practice and the situation, all of these can lead to situations where either no decision is made, or to situations where decisions made are inconsistent with one another over time

Several types of group decisions:

l. Unilateral - a decision made by one person, often the nominal leader, without consultation with other group members. At times, it can be appropriate. For example, a minor decision that needs to be made right away. If it is repeated and inappropriate, this type of decision can carry a very low group commitment.
2. Handclasp - decisions made by two members. One suggests, the other endorses and carries it through without adequate discussion or group consideration. This type has high commitment for the two who made it, but generally not for the others.
3. Clique - similar to the Handclasp but with more people involved. This type usually occurs when a close sub-group decides what is good for the rest of the group. Repeated clique decisions cause splintering of the group and low commitment.
4. Baiting - a technique that reduces discussions around decisions. A person will say, "Now we are all agreed, right?!" and only the very brave will speak up. This usually supresses obvious dissention and lowers group commitment.
5. Majority Rule - a popular way of making decisions. However, if the outcome of a secret ballot vote would produce any surprises, it is not a good time to make majority rule decisions. What happens is that a sizeable segment of the group may feel devalued and decrease their commitment to the decisions in which they "lose" to the majority vote.
6. Consensus - similar to Majority Rule, but everyone knows that what they think and value is being considered by all, and there will be no surprises if you vote. Each person will agree that, under the circumstances, which may not be ideal, the decision made is a fair and workable one that they can live with and support.

You may be able to think of and classify other types of decisions. Any type may prove effective under a given set of circumstances. However, it is obvious that the first five approaches are likely to reinforce the powerful in the group and create tension. Morale and membership commitment can be lowered if these are the usual methods of making organizational decisions.

Since members possess the essential ingredients for the solutions to all problems, group decisions should be based on all members' input. Certainly, if there are decisions that only take a few people to make, it may not be necessary to involve an entire group. We recommend that you consider the following points about the assets and liabilities of consensus decisions.

Rule Making

In administrative law, rulemaking refers to the process that executive agencies use to create, or promulgate, regulations. In general, legislatures first set broad policy mandates by passing laws, and then agencies create more detailed regulations through rulemaking. By bringing detailed scientific expertise to bear on policy, the rulemaking process has powered the success of some of the most notable government achievements of the 20th century. For example, science-based regulations are critical to modern programs for environmental protection, food safety, and workplace safety. However, explosive growths in regulations have fueled criticism that the rulemaking process reduces the transparency and accountability of democratic government

Purposes

Adding scientific expertise.
Adding implementation detail.
Adding industry expertise.
Adding flexibility.
Finding compromise.

Majoritarianism

A political philosophy or agenda which asserts that a majority (sometimes categorized by religion, language or some other identifying factor) of the population is entitled to a certain degree of primacy in society, and has the right to make decisions that affect the society. Under a majoritarian political structure the majority has a single restriction—it is not allowed to exclude any minority from future participation in the democratic process. Majoritarianism is sometimes pejoratively called ochlocracy (commonly stated as mob rule) or tyranny of the majority by its opponents.

Majority rule

(a concept closely aligned with majoritarianism) is defined as the rule that requires more than half of a polity's members who cast a vote to agree in order for the whole polity to make a decision on the measure being voted on. More broadly, the term is used in discussions regarding the principles of majority rule and the protection of individual and minority rights. A common misconception of majority rule is that it can be soundly used to determine equal rights among a class of voters. However, the class of voters and their rights must be decided beforehand as a separate act. Majority rule, utilized thereafter as a convincing method of democratic decision making, is then assumed to be universally binding among all voters as a function of equal rights. This logic prevents the use of voting as a majoritarian tyranny. Any decision that unfairly targets a voting minority could be said to be majoritarian, but would not be a logically sound example of a majority decision which assumes categorical rights established by charter.

Minoritarianism

It is a neologism (essentially meaning minority rule) that describes a political philosophy or agenda which asserts that a segment of a country's population (sometimes categorized by religion, language, or some other identifying factor) to which a minority of its citizens belong is entitled to a certain degree of primacy in that country's society, giving it the right to make decisions that affect the society.

Horizontal Divider 20

The website is done by Carmela Dalisay and Carolyn Nazareno and Argie Lyne Molina as a project in Decision Making subject. We hope to help other students and researchers. Thank you for visiting our sites, hope it will help you a lot in your research.