Power: Stability and Destabilization of Legitimacy
Understanding the factors that stabilize or destabilize various sources of power legitimacy can provide valuable insights into how institutions maintain authority and when they risk losing it.
Main searches:
Understanding the factors that stabilize or destabilize various sources of power legitimacy can provide valuable insights into how institutions maintain authority and when they risk losing it.
Understanding how individuals choose goals can provide insight into human decision-making and inform strategies for influencing the choice of goals through decision governance.
Goal stability and change are influenced by a complex interplay of commitment strength, feedback mechanisms, external pressures, cognitive dissonance, and social reinforcement. Understanding these factors allows individuals and organizations to design decision making environments that either reinforce goal persistence or facilitate adaptive goal adjustments when necessary.
Understanding these mechanisms can help improve decision-making quality, improve leadership effectiveness, and help organizations design better incentive structures to align individual goals with priorities.
Decision governance can play a critical role in creating, maintaining, and adapting social hierarchies. The design of decision governance systems influences both the stability and adaptability of hierarchies.
If decision governance in a firm were to develop in a manner analogous to the development of English Common Law, it would develop in response to lessons learned from cases of past decision making.
Why does decision governance change in a firm? Change to decision governance is motivated by either the implementation of principles, that is, abstract rules, or because of lessons from past decision making.
A common problem with governance is that rules accumulate over time. They are added and adapted to handle new situations, new behaviors, and, or have a broader and deeper impact. As rules accumulate, and become more interdependent and specialized, complexity of governance increases. What are the consequences?
This text is about so-called policy windows, situations in which three streams of activity – the problem, policy, and politics streams – align to create an opportunity for policy change within organizations.
This text looks at signals to look for when applying a decision process, to determine if that process cannot be incrementally improved, but needs to be significantly changed.
Incrementalism prioritizes pragmatic adjustments of the current state over transformational solutions, focusing on feasibility and continuity. What are the conditions in which it is interesting to implement incrementalism through decision governance, and what risks does that create?
When a decision process is adapted to comply with a policy, it will include new components – new actions, roles, responsibilities, among others. At the same time, the process needs to be further adapted to ensure that when it is executed, data is collected that can be used as evidence of compliance later on.
Given a specific policy that an organization needs to comply with, how can we adapt the organization’s decision processes to comply with that policy? Or, how does that organization’s decision governance change to help ensure compliance?
This text outlines how the mechanisms for public policy compliance influence various stages of decision-making. If we understand how this influence can occur, we can build decision governance in ways that ensure compliance with the right amount of resources.
Public policies shape decisions and consequently incorporate decision governance. It is interesting to understand how public policy develops and changes, as this helps understand how decision governance can develop and change.