Decided defences

五月 10, 2002

Winston Fletcher's viciously elegant review (Books, THES , May 3) dispatches Helga Drummond's The Art of Decision Making to the wastepaper basket of history. But as he cuts and thrusts, he strikes two targets worthy of defence.

First, there is his derision of decision science as the author's academic discipline. I must declare an interest, as my department runs an MSc with that title. The name does not imply, as Fletcher asserts, a claim that decision-making or the study of it is a science. It describes an approach to providing support to decision-makers that uses information, models and facilitated group processes. In the right circumstances, this can give decision-makers the confidence and clarity to deploy their intuition and craft more effectively.

Second, Fletcher lampoons the idea of focusing on decisions that go wrong. But looking at evident failures is not self-evidently a bad way of learning how to do better. It is not happenstance that both academic and practitioner interest in risk is rising. This growth tracks the prevalence of dangers that result not from "acts of God" but from the interaction of systems of "our" own making.

Jonathan Rosenhead
London School of Economics

请先注册再继续

为何要注册?

  • 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
注册
Please 登录 or 注册 to read this article.