Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Introduction
- I OVERVIEW PAPER
- II CONCEPTIONS OF CHOICE
- III BELIEFS AND JUDGMENTS ABOUT UNCERTAINTIES
- IV VALUES AND UTILITIES
- V AREAS OF APPLICATION
- 22 BEHAVIOR UNDER UNCERTAINTY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY
- 23 THE RELEVANCE OF QUASI RATIONALITY IN COMPETITIVE MARKETS
- 24 HOW SENIOR MANAGERS THINK
- 25 PROBLEMS IN PRODUCING USABLE KNOWLEDGE FOR IMPLEMENTING LIBERATING ALTERNATIVES
- 26 ON THE FRAMING OF MEDICAL DECISIONS
- 27 WHETHER OR NOT TO ADMINISTER AMPHOTERICIN TO AN IMMUNOSUPPRESSED PATIENT WITH HEMATOLOGIC MALIGNANCY AND UNDIAGNOSED FEVER
- 28 THE EFFECT OF PRIVATE ATTITUDES ON PUBLIC POLICY: PRENATAL SCREENING FOR NEURAL TUBE DEFECTS AS APROTOTYPE
- 29 DISCUSSION AGENDA FOR THE SESSION ON MEDICAL DECISION MAKING and MINUTES OF A GROUP DISCUSSION ON CLINICAL DECISION MAKING
- Index
25 - PROBLEMS IN PRODUCING USABLE KNOWLEDGE FOR IMPLEMENTING LIBERATING ALTERNATIVES
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 March 2011
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Introduction
- I OVERVIEW PAPER
- II CONCEPTIONS OF CHOICE
- III BELIEFS AND JUDGMENTS ABOUT UNCERTAINTIES
- IV VALUES AND UTILITIES
- V AREAS OF APPLICATION
- 22 BEHAVIOR UNDER UNCERTAINTY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY
- 23 THE RELEVANCE OF QUASI RATIONALITY IN COMPETITIVE MARKETS
- 24 HOW SENIOR MANAGERS THINK
- 25 PROBLEMS IN PRODUCING USABLE KNOWLEDGE FOR IMPLEMENTING LIBERATING ALTERNATIVES
- 26 ON THE FRAMING OF MEDICAL DECISIONS
- 27 WHETHER OR NOT TO ADMINISTER AMPHOTERICIN TO AN IMMUNOSUPPRESSED PATIENT WITH HEMATOLOGIC MALIGNANCY AND UNDIAGNOSED FEVER
- 28 THE EFFECT OF PRIVATE ATTITUDES ON PUBLIC POLICY: PRENATAL SCREENING FOR NEURAL TUBE DEFECTS AS APROTOTYPE
- 29 DISCUSSION AGENDA FOR THE SESSION ON MEDICAL DECISION MAKING and MINUTES OF A GROUP DISCUSSION ON CLINICAL DECISION MAKING
- Index
Summary
Social scientists have become increasingly concerned with their possible responsibility to question and to change the status quo (Dahrendorf, 1958; Deutch and Hornstein, 1975; Habermas, 1972; Lazarsfeld and Rietz, 1975; Mitroff and Kilman, 1978; Moscovici, 1972). A need for research on “liberating alternatives” is being expressed. Examining this literature, one finds a dearth of research on how to implement the “liberating alternatives” suggested by the social scientists.
Implementation has often been considered “applied” or “practical,” thereby delegating it to the domain of vocational activities, a domain that scientists rarely have supported. Recently, however, a recognition has developed that there are very powerful intellectual issues in moving from ideas to action (Lindblom and Cohen, 1979). It is the purpose of this paper to explore some of the “individual” factors that will make implementing liberating alternatives difficult.
The paper contains two interrelated arguments. Individuals, acting as agents for various kinds of organizations, must do the actual implementing. They bring to this task theories of action (probably learned early in their lives) which when used correctly will be counterproductive to implementing liberating alternatives. While acting, individuals are unaware of the counterproductivity of their actions. The unawareness is due to their culturally learned theories of action. The word “individual” above was placed in quotes because although individuals may do the implementing, the theories of action in their heads–the theories that they will use – are, I suggest, examples of massive socialization processes.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Decision MakingDescriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions, pp. 540 - 561Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1988
- 11
- Cited by