3 ms·
People subject to the internal incentives of a part of the system aren't the best people to make objective judgments for the whole system. And the alternative
by wumi 18y ago
People subject to the internal incentives of a part of the system aren't the best people to make objective judgments for the whole system.
And the alternative is ... "I'm the President, so I know what to do with schools(NCLB)" ?
Actually, you pretty much hit the nail on the head -- ask any soldier who's been involved boots on the ground in the American battlefronts in the middle east, and I betcha alot of them have a better idea of what's going on than your average news commentator or politician.
You may not like the analogy, but this very argument is the thesis of most Pres. Bush administration policy -- refusing the advice of those with what you call "internal incentives," which I'm loosely interpreting to mean -- on the ground with first-hand experience.
- tfinniga 18y agoWell, the alternative you suggested is not the only alternative. As you point out, it's a rather bad one. Perhaps a better one is to study similar situations, talk to all members of a system and get feedback, and then make a decision based on the feedback of all involved. To use your example, asking soldiers what they want to do will result in one set of answers. Asking generals another. Politicians another (politicians certainly are incentivised/biased in this situation). Civilians in the affected regions another. But to come up with the most objective judgment for the system as a whole, you should get people who are not in the system, but have access to all information available on it, including the desires of all involved.
- wumi 18y agocertainly a preferable alternative to the one I provided. :)