1

ARTICLE REVIEW 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Name of the Article Name of the Researcher Institution Type of Research Research Theory Number of Pages Published by Constraints, Compromises and Decision Making Gary Goertz Department of Political Science, University of Arizona Qualitative Poliheuristic Theory 24 including 3 Tables Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol 48, 1 February 2004, pages 14-37, Sage Publications. About the Author 8. The article Constraints, Compromises and Decision Making is a philosophical work of Gary Goertz. A renowned scholar, Gary Goertz, had remained on the faculty of department of Political Science in the University of Arizona. In this article, Gary Goertz explains the significance of compromise in decision making process through application of Poliheuristic Theory. Poliheuristic Theory 9. According to the researcher, Poliheuristic theory argues that we need to model multiple goals and constraints. Once the constraints are endogenized, the problem can be restated in terms of utility functions. In short, the decision making under constraints is closely related to the question of what is the appropriate utility function for a decision maker with multiple goals. Once multiple goals are included, then arises the need to model how goals interact according to non-compensatory principle. Review 10. In his article, the researcher has reformulated the decision making under constraints as a question about multiple goals and utility functions. In any given situation, a problem will arise for a decision maker about how the issue and various options relate to her or his goals say policy or election.

The researcher notes that by doing this, the constraints are actually endogenized. He further argues that not only can constraints be reformulated as goals, but some people also really do have the constraints as goals. 11. The researcher notes that one persons exogenous constraint is another persons endogenous goal. To support his argument, the researcher exemplify that poliheuristic analysis often take domestic politics and public opinion as one kind of constraint on foreign policy choice in democracies. According to the researcher, in other contexts some have argued that one goal of politician is reelection. He further notes that if same is accepted then foreign policy will be constraint on the reelection. However in case of politicians, the researcher concludes, the realistic view is that they have both policy and election goals. 12. The researcher further notes that in the decision making situation of real life a course of action, to be acceptable, must satisfy a whole set of requirements or constraints. To support his theory, the researcher quotes Herbert Simon who writes that sometimes one of these requirements, or constraints, is signed out and referred to as the goal of action. He further notes that the choice of one constraint from many is to a large extent arbitrary. The researcher argues that for many purposes it is more meaningful to refer to the whole set of requirements as the complex goal of action. Herbert Simon notes that above conclusion applies both to individual and organizational decision making. 13. The researcher concludes the study by showing how the insights of poliheuristic choice have important implications for spatial modeling and the choice of utility function. He writes that the standard utility functions used in the literature almost uniformly violate the core notions of Poliheuristic Theory. In words of the researcher, if we take non-compensatory decision making, loss avoidance and the positive value of compromise seriously, one would choose other utility functions. 14. The researcher further notes that the decision making under constraints idea reflects a different way to avoid negative values on an important dimension. He writes that a constraint must be satisfied before maximization

can proceed. In other words, the decision maker avoids options that are negative, as defined by the constraint, before making an optimal choice. Also, once the constraints have been endogenized, this then becomes a general principle to avoid options that score low on one goal, even if the score is high on other dimensions. The researcher further argues that the gains in other dimensions do not compensate for the low value on the constraint/ goal.

Reviewed By: Roll No.18, Naveed