Read the textbook first, then Lindblom, then Eubanks, if you have time look at some of the

supplementary readings indicated in Dr. Lai’s notes.

Approaches to decision making

Kettl

(Bounded) Rational (root) – maximize (satisfactory levels of) efficiency

Bargaining (incremental/branch) – maximize political support

Participative Decision-Making – improve decisions by involving affected parties

Public Choice – make decisions based on market forces: undermines the principles of government?

Lindblom

Root (rational-comprehensive) vs Branch (successive limited comparisons) (p. 81)

Core debate while using root approach (deciding policy method and objectives at same time):

Maximizing public value (who decides what they are, and in the case of conflicting values, how to strike
a balance/which one prevails? – marginal preferences)

Efficiency vs equality (public perception?)

Different ends (political conflict – why), same means (policy approach – how)

Branch method simplifies (information/analysis-wise) this, one step at a time (marginal/incremental

changes), common in democracies especially when political parties/public share values – non-
incremental policies often political suicide and practically impossible, therefore irrelevant and irrational.

Policy-making usually gradual therefore branch method more practical/appropriate – allows for
mistakes and lack of knowledge.
A message from my predecessor, Dr. Larry Lai (I have highlighted the important bits/redacted some
parts):

One of our discussion questions, from our Course Outline, is: Compare the major decision-making
models and identify their strengths and weaknesses.

Surely you will know how to describe each of those models once you have been to the readings. What is
more interesting, I think, is HOW to compare the models. The pros and cons as put in the textbook
chapter are convenient, yet they are also way too brief. The textbook chapter should be your starting
point in your preparation for the tutorial, but you really need to move on and look at other required
readings.

The Science of Muddling Through, and A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice are classic pieces,
i.e., I read them when I did my Intro to Public Admin course (when you were not born yet)! When I
[Larry] was in Year 1, I found them not easy to follow (So, no worries if you are having similar difficulties
that I have had), partly because I was too ignorant of the job positions of a policy administrator/
manager, or a policy maker (whom may or may not work in a government department), as well as how
the three branches of government and political parties, interest groups, etc. interact. If you are new to
all these (I know some of you just took this course as your first one in the study of social sciences), you
need to catch up with the basic knowledge of these terms and concepts. So, a convenient way to do this
is to browse through an introductory textbook on politics.

In The Science of Muddling Through, Lindblom argues that while the rational-comprehensive approach,
or the “root method”, was seen to be the way the government adopted in making decisions, this
actually is not the case. Rather, when facing policy problems that are more often than not complicated,
the “branch method” is actually taken by the administrators. The example on the bottom left of p.87
(about policy-making in the light of combating juvenile delinquency) can illustrate the case. And this
article is important to our discussion about when and why a policy administrator use and not use the
root method and the branch method.

In A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice, the authors argue (with empirical support) that the
decision opportunities in public administration are actually chaotic, like a mess in a garbage can, the
processes within organizations are therefore more complicated (than what you put in your Facebook
status.) If the authors’ understanding of public administration is true, then, any other given decision
making models does not best/precisely capture how the various public organizations (which surely
include but do not limit to the government departments) operate in making decisions. In other words
(and if the authors are correct), what was commonly perceived to be the case in public decision-making,
i.e., the assumptions and processes in the comprehensive -rationality model is actually not the case in
reality.

Last but not the least, the parts of the book Administrative Behavior are helpful in making sense of the
limits of the rational decision-making models at the individual level: On each of the job positions in any
public organization (a government department or otherwise), each agent (i.e., person) suffers from all
those constraints when s/he makes a decision. These constraints include ‘incompleteness of knowledge,
difficulties of anticipating consequences, human docility, memory,’ etc., and all these affect and shape
how all agents coordinate in organizational activities (e.g., offering a solution to a public policy
problem).

Having the above in mind, I [Larry] thereby list here some questions that you may address in the small-
circle discussion (with an additional remark about the second discussion question in the 2023/24 edition
of the course):

 When and why does a policy administrator use and not use the root method and the branch
method?
 Should we bother the simple rationality decision-making model? Why or why not?
 Are incremental model and garbage can model actually the same model (but in different
names), or they are actually different models but they are compatible (this is to say, the same
case about how a decision is made can be logically explained by both models without conflict),
or they are actually two incompatible models (this is to say, the same case that can be explained
by the incremental model cannot be explained by the garbage can model)? (Note: compatibility
of models listed by Kettl/Lindblom? Since this is an introductory course, you don’t really need to
think about this.)
 (For those who believe that they know a good deal about what the Hong Kong Government has
been doing this summer), which decision-making model do you think can best/least explain the
decisions made by the Government (on the issue of the Extradition Bill)? Since we don’t have
time to go over the details of the case, I won’t tell you the story in the tutorial, those who want
to discuss this question need to do your own preparation.)
 With regards to the second question this week: Impact of big data and technology on the all the
decision-making models? How does it make some more/less attractive/appropriate to policy
makers? Bias from big data (Eubanks)?