Decision making by Objection and the Cuban Missile Crisis

Paul A. Anderson Patcharawan Ubonleot

5710131001

23 September 2015

GSPA NIDA

Outline

• Significance and Background of the crisis

• Argument and Analysis

• Findings

Decision making by objection Model

• Critique

• Conclusion

2

Outline

• Significance and Background of the crisis

• Argument and Analysis

• Findings Decision making by objection Model

• Critique

• Conclusion

3

Significance

Confrontation between the U.S. and the Soviet

Union during the Cold War making the two

superpowers came closest to nuclear conflict.

The crisis is unique in numerous ways ranging from

calculations and miscalculations as well as direct

and underground communications and

miscommunications between the two rivals.

It was principally played out at the White House

and the Kremlin level with little input from the

relevant bureaucracies. U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian

4

Background

In 1962 after U.S. (John F. Kennedy) failed to conquer Castro

regime it was found that Russia (Nikita Khrushchev) reached

an agreement to set up a missile site in Cuba.

U.S. (Kennedy) had options proposed by his top advisors-

either destroy missiles and attack Cuba or send

uncompromising warning to missiles removal

During the crisis several rigid and vague yet reconcilable

messages were conveyed by direct message, television

statement including discussion between Attorney General

Robert Kennedy that secretly met with Soviet Ambassador to

the United States.

The president finally decided to use naval quarantine.

Eventually, Soviet agreed to remove the missile from Cuba.

5

Outline

• Significance and Background of the crisis

• Argument and Analysis

• Findings Decision making by objection Model

• Critique

• Conclusion

6

Argument: Tradition decision making process

• Possible alternatives

Search for

• Consequences

Examine • Consequences

and desirable objective

Evaluate

G o a l

7

Argument

8

Organizational decision making

Capacity of

Human

Limited information processing of human to perform goals to choice task because the goal to choices sequence is not what decision maker do

Problematic preferences Vague goa l s

Fluid participationLo ss a t tent ion

Unclear technologiesLo ss i n means and ends

IN

C r i s i s o u t s i d e o r g a n i z a t i o n

Irrationality decision making

Influence/attention

of politician

Individual background

& constraints i.e. time

Reckless analysis

Organized anarchies

Problem

Solution

Actors (Participants)

OUT

A Garbage Can Model

Outline

• Significance and Background of the crisis

• Argument and Analysis Findings

• Decision making by objection Model

• Critique

• Conclusion

9

Analysis

10

The group argued…..debated….challenged each other's

assumptions, predictions and….options

Executive Committee of the National Security Council (the ExCom)

Analysis

11

Qualitative method

Coding the document, Determining binary net

Coding categories

Data

Archival records : position papers, notes, minutes and summary records of the ExCom meetings Unit of analysis

sentences from archival records

Results

Frequency of the different kinds of interactions

in the four meetings of the ExCom

Outline

• Significance and Background of the crisis

• Argument and Analysis

• Findings

Decision making by objection Model

• Critique

• Conclusion

12

Findings

• The evidence suggests that the decision of the ExCom throughout the crisis did

not follow the standard description of decision making

task Not Goal oriented

• Instead, decision makers discover goal throughout the course of

making decision. In fact, the decision makers do not

even seek a solution to a problem but a course of action

that do not have a high probability of making the

situation worse Solving problem is a minor concern

13

• Decision is made by group decision making

via argumentation and debate

• Goal discovery occurs as a result of the

interaction of advocates of

conflicting views

• An alternative with a high possibility of

making matters worse will face

objections and rejected

• The process stimulates the

discovery of goals

14

The decision is actually made by

Findings

It is deviated from the standard model !

Not always competing choices but a sum of mixed choices

15

Airstrike

Impose a blockade

Military measure Quarantine, inspection at sea, surveillance

Blocking import and export

Diplomatic pressure Restriction of

Petroleum, oil and Fuel import, UN Condemnation

1. Structure of alternatives

2. Goal Discovery

16

Global goal

(Moral/tradition) Concern that

objects proposed

option

Discussion & Debate

Acceptable alternatives

Go a l

“A surprise attack by a very large

nation against a very small one.

This, I said, could not be undertaken

by the U.S. if we were to maintain

our moral position at home and

around the globe” Robert Kennedy

discovery is a social process in which the causal texture link objectives, constraints, and imperatives with alternatives and their consequences through discussion and debate.

3. Evaluation of Alternatives

17

G o o d high probability of producing a positively

valued and a low probability of producing

a negatively valued state of affairs.

B l a n d low probabilities of producing either

positively or negatively valued states of

affairs.

Mixed high probabilities of producing positively

or negatively valued states of affairs.

Po o r low probability of producing a positively

valued and a high probability of

producing

a negatively valued state of affairs.

Paradoxical about a good," "optimal," or satisfactory”

Bland alternatives, those with low

probabilities of either

success or failure, will

be acceptable when

no good alternative

is readily available

Reformulating Decision making by objection Model

18

1. A problem is defined and a global goal is also identified. A Rough description of an acceptable resolution of the problem.

2. A course of action is proposed. The alternative will be accompanied by an argument describing

the positive outcomes related with undertaking the action.

3. Possibility of one of three responses:

3.1 lf there is agreement it will be ratified.

3.2 If there is no support/formal opposition the alternative will die.

3.3 If there is an objection to the alternative and the effect is to propose constraints, beyond the global goal, that further

define an acceptable resolution.

4. If there is disagreement over the newly introduced constraint

A secondary discussion on the merits of the new goal may arise.

Only if there is an imperative to act will a competing course of action be proposed.

5. In the absence of an imperative to act the original alternative is generally discarded and a different independent course of action is proposed.

Key features of Decision making by Objection

19

3 F e a t u r e s

Ambiguity and change in

preferred courses of action.

As new goals discovered,

preferences change, and

as options are proposed,

individuals change

arguments they make-

Lack of reference from competing action

Ambiguous, ever-changing set of options

Confusing process and loss of leadership

Outline

• Significance and Background of the crisis

• Argument and Analysis

• Findings Decision making by objection Model

• Critique

• Conclusion

20

Critique

21

The Cuban missile crisis is also investigated and explained by many

scholars such as Allison through three different lens: rational actor

model, Organizational Process" model, and the

“Bureaucratic/Governmental Politics" model. Action and its

consequences are both products of administration between

organizations and interaction of players whose interests are typically

mixed.

Anderson ignores extensive explanation of each key actors in term of

personal interests and values but emphasize it as a power to generate

shared goal and courses of action.

However, its emphasis on the decision environment influencing goal

generation helps understand and predict the expected degree of courses of action.

Framework for Analysis

Research method and Quality of data collected Qualitative method for analysis is to some extent appropriate for documentary analysis. However, only data from four meetings were used.

Critique

22

Benefits for organization analysis Obvious benefits for foreign policy analysis

We attempt to study and use different method i.e. cost- benefits,

multi-criteria etc. for searching, analyzing and evaluating possible

alternatives.

And end up with policy decision that is heavily inherently determined

by social interaction and arrival of mutually shared norms, interests

and values.

Findings and its power to generalization

The data used are based on 4 ExCom (5-8) meetings. 2,3,4 and 9

meetings are classified. The first meeting was not recorded. Was there

crucial evidence for goal and alternative initiation?

The author assumes that the actors shared goal in national interests.

If personal motive involved, it must have been justified. This could undermine the framework of analysis.

Outline

• Significance and Background of the crisis

• Argument and Analysis

• Findings Decision making by objection Model

• Critique

• Conclusion

23

Conclusion

• Human is irrational actor trying to preserve rights to

survive which usually exploits others’ rights and interests.

• But in scarce resources and complex situation

human has limited capability in processing and

analyzing information particularly where many

actors involve.

• Decision makers do not always seek optimal

solution particularly when facing constraints. They

usually seek satisfying options that provide minimum

risk of failures.

24

Conclusion

Therefore.......

• The decision made is rather a product of social interaction associating with personal values, goals and interests.

• Organization decision is not intellectual as one anticipate. It is not linear. And it is hard to predict.

• So if one seeks to understand how a policy is shaped not only in chaotic situation , this model should not be ignored.

• Even this is only findings drawn from one case, one should compare with similar phenomenon, find the fit and apply it appropriately.

25

THANK YOU

26