Cover: A Proposal for Analyzing the Process of Decisionmaking in Foreign Affairs

A Proposal for Analyzing the Process of Decisionmaking in Foreign Affairs

Published 1969

by Marshall W. Wiley

Purchase Print Copy

 Format Price
Add to Cart Paperback17 pages $20.00

Critical description of the present decisionmaking system in terms of new institutional arrangements needed to coordinate the required research effort and advocate organizational change. The U.S. decisionmaking system today is described as a complex, hierarchical network of individuals, with the President and his senior advisers at the apex, who interact in ways that are both complex and poorly understood. This study suggests two approaches for the improvement of decisionmaking in foreign affairs: (1) a stronger commitment and an improved capability for organizational change at a high level of the decisionmaking system, and (2) an expanded program of fundamental research on the decisionmaking process employing concepts from recent advances in the social sciences.

This report is part of the RAND paper series. The paper was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.