Meaning that the social exchange theory is based off a rewards concept, but all cultures are different and in some cultures they may not seek a reward for a relationship. The second level of critique of exchange theory involves the relationship between economic and social exchange. Economic and behaviorist models tend to reduce social exchange to a set of market-like exchanges of material objects driven by extrinsic motivations like gain, even when it declaratively distinguishes between the two.
While this model allows for taking structured and informed decisions, it places serious limitations that sap the vitality of an organization. Such an information and knowledge based approach promotes consistent and high quality decisionsand reduces the risk and uncertainties associated with decisions.
The rational method infuses the decision-making process with discipline, consistency, and logic.
It is a step-by-step approach that requires defining problem, identifying the weighing and decision criteria, listing out the various alternatives, deliberating the present and future consequences of each alternative, and rating each alternative on each criterion.
Such a sequential approach allows the decision maker to arrive at the optimal decision. The methodology caters to addressing complex issues by breaking it down into simple steps, and considering all aspects of the problem with all possible solutions before making a final decision.
In the age of fast-paced changes, seizing the opportunity at the spur of the moment plays a big part in success, and the rational model does not live up to this task. Moreover, delay in making and implementing a decision may result in dilution of the perceived benefit of such an alternative, for the benefits may accrue only when taken at that time.
As such, this model finds use mostly in making long-term and policy decisions rather than short-term or floor level operational decisions. Rational decision-making is steeped in conservatism, and errs on the side of caution. Many a time, the company makes it big when managers or leaders follow their gut instincts to take a gamble and seize an opportunity.
Similarly, many times success depends on being the pioneer in the field, or the first to launch a new and untested product, which may find wide acceptance. Limiting decisions to analysis of available data may impede such approaches. The unavailability of past tends or information about such new products or opportunities causes rational decision makers to opt for more secure and conventional options.
Rational decisions are more structured and informed, but people making such decisions usually become unpopular, with the rank and file perceiving them as insensitive autocratic leaders. Over-reliance on the bottom line, with scant regard to human values, slowly but surely erodes the organization of its intellectual capital and resilience, sowing the seeds for its eventual destruction.
The fruits of rational decisions become apparent only in the long run, and the rank and file usually do not get to see immediate or tangible returns or benefits of the decision.
This combined with the insensitivity to human emotions causes a negative perception.
The rational model assumes that the decision maker has accurate information and knowledge of the situation, the underlying cause and effect relationships to evaluate various situations, and the necessary tools and competence.
This need not always remain the case. Very often the quantity, quality, accuracy, and integrity of information may be found wanting. Moreover, the reliance of scientific data to generate the most optimal choice works well in theory, but human ability has limits to gather, process, and understand all the information needed to optimize a decision outcome.
Such defects in information directly translate to a defect in the decision. This model also assumes that conditions remain stable. The real world always remains in a constant state of flux and, very often, the information needed to make a decision either remains incomplete or keeps constantly changing, forcing the decision makers to improvise.
Ultimately, how people make decisions depends on their culture, conventions, experience, education, and many more factors. The pros and cons of the rational decision-making approach suggests that it finds use as a facilitating tool to aid decision-making and supplement the existing system in certain situations.
Imposing it as a decision-making system by uprooting the existing system may become counterproductive. Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.Chapter 1 The Success and Failure of Rational Choice The rational choice approach, despite widespread criticism, has reached rapidly-growing subﬁeld of decision theory, while often rejecting the appears to be a growing consensus about the strengths and weaknesses of the approach.
To put it brieﬂy, the main strengths of the approach. Name: John Horsfield Personal ID: W Assignment No: TMA07 Strengths and weaknesses of rational choice theory explaination of crime Introduction. Definition of Crime – A deviation from the normal practice of society and rules that govern ‘normal’ behaviour.
Description of. The primary purpose of this paper is to introduce an alternative, grid-group theory, to the conventional liberal-conservative continuum for understanding the structure of mass belief systems. We also examine the potential advantages of this alternative in explaining preference formation with a series of exploratory empirical comparisons of the relative strengths and weaknesses of grid-group.
RATIONAL CHOICE RESEARCH IN CRIMINOLOGY: A MULTI-LEVEL FRAMEWORK Ross L. Matsueda INTRODUCTION A challenging puzzle for rational choice theory concerns the causes and control of criminal behavior.
Crime is a difficult case for rational choice. Compared to . Passionate about something niche? Reddit has thousands of vibrant communities with people that share your interests.
Strengths and weaknesses of rational choice theory? (ph-vs.comcalScience) submitted Institutional Change and Economic Performance Douglass North argues that rational choice theory mistakenly assumes actors have complete.
Strengths and weaknesses of a new sociological research program Karl-Dieter Opp Department of Sociology, University of Leipzig is equivalent to a wide version of rational choice theory. Furthermore, the focus on theories of the middle range in AS .