Which of the two theories discussed better fits into the decision-making process of criminal justice organizations? Why?
The theory of the incremental method, also called “the branch” better fits into the, decision making process of criminal justice organization. This method relies on the existence of work procedures that are already established before hand. This method requires that the alternative procedures considered include only those that are similar to existing procedures. The alternatives are then considered with regard to their strengths and weaknesses. Thus, the work procedures and solutions selected are only slightly different from the past (John, 2005).
Criminal justice organizations stop and sense crime. In the, process of decision making, large, mistakes are avoided through incremental changes which mostly lead to a completely new course of action. When making decisions here, the probability of making errors is low and thus the decisions made can be highly relied upon. In the case of an error though, correction is easy because, change is normally small (Robert, 2007).
The incremental process of decision making better fits the criminal justice organizations because less information is required when making decisions. This is advantageous because they may not have all the information when making investigations. Getting in formation to solve problems in highly complex organizations is usually complex and the incremental process comes in handy because it causes an improvement in the situation even when the overall, conflict cannot be resolved. The steps coordinate to make possible the change of a wider conflict (Thomas, 2005).
The incremental process therefore presents a fair situation to the solution of a problem. A conflict becomes sufficiently ripe for successful negotiations if allowed to have enough incremental development. The nature of the conflict is changed significantly even thou the maturity can not be fully attained. For example the dilemma of abortion between pro-life and pro-choice brought a controversy for many years between them. Even if a final solution was never achieved, and the two groups remain as polarized as ever, they are reported to have learnt to respect and even like each other.
Do you think this is the best method?
I do not think this is the best method because though there is a final out come of change, the process is relatively slow and cannot be useful in situations which require a prompt solution. There is also the issue of the status quo which the team is likely to take advantage of any innovations that require change from the status quo. The organizations using the incremental theory are not able to fit in the highly made modernisms in time, risking the possibility of their work being outdated. If an organization decides to solely focus on incremental changes, solutions reached are likely to involve insignificant changes for the existing problem and the changes only made “at the margin”. If parties become too careful in their attempts to come to an agreement, radical innovations end up being lost (Pietro, 2004).
The increment method of decision making is very risky because it focuses, on major conflict matters at the onset. It can cause the alteration of a course of a conflict especially in cases of constant death loss of optimism and lack of having innovative approaches. It is not the best method for the core reason that it is not realistic and is mostly based on theory. It is never possible in real life, for example to sort out and rank all values of objects related to a certain problem. This is because values and objectives must be stated in secondary terms basing on their particular policies. Since there is always a difference between the two policies, a choice has to be made between the two which often brings the controversy.
The incremental decision making process is also biased thus not the best method. According to Robert, powerful interests and organized parties have been observed to dictate over the procedure of decision making. They end up discouraging and restraining basic social innovation. Decision-makers are thus painted a picture of people who are in capable of exert any influence in the whole process. Those who have the voice and authority end up making basic decisions independently, which are mostly geared towards achieving their own interests (Robert, 2007).
The incremental theory does not offer the most paramount method because it does not consider all the options while getting the best choice. In the process it may end up choosing a bad choice while it would have taken a better one. The approach does not take into account benefits for the society. It ends up only proposing change by only recognizing that some programs are legal over others. In the process, it adds a certain, percentage on some allocations over others (Thomas, 2005).
Thus, though the incremental theory of decision-making better fits into the decision-making process of criminal justice organizations because it intertwines the means and the end, it is not the best because it has its weaknesses.
Reference
John, K, et al. (2005). Information modeling methods and methodologies. New York:
Idea Group Inc (IGI).
Pietro, C, et al. (2004). Analyzing strategic environmental assessment: towards better decision- making. New York: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Robert, B. (2007). Theories of Public Organization. New York: Cengage Learning
Thomas, A. (2005). An introduction to the policy process: theories, concepts, and models of public policymaking. Harvard: M.E. Sharpe.
