Garbage can model
The Garbage Can Model (also known as garbage can process, or garbage can theory) is a model used to explain situations where problems, solutions, and decision makers are all disconnected from each other, as opposed to traditional decision theory. Preferences and technology are unclear, and participation is fluid. A common example for an environment where the garbage can model of decision making occurs are universities. The model was first described in the seminal 1972 paper, A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice, by Michael D. Cohen, James G. March, and Johan P. Olsen.[1]
This model is a part of what is defined as organizational anarchy, within the larger field of organizational behavior. In organizational anarchy, despite the fact that decision making looks chaotic, a choice opportunity (decision situation) can be seen as a “garbage can” (hence, giving our model it’s name) into which various sets of problems (budget reduction, inflation), and sets of solutions (reduction of employees, reduction of consumption), are dumped by different participants involved in the organization (employees, employers). This process then continues to evolve dynamically.
1. Organized Anarchy
1.1 Problematic preferences
1.2 Unclear technology
1.3 Fluid participation
2. Decision streams
2.1 Problems
2.2 Solutions
2.3 Participants
2.4 Choice opportunities
3. Early findings on the Garbage Can Model
3.1 Decision style
3.2 Problem activity
3.3. Problem latency
3.4 Decision maker activity
3.5 Decision difficulty
4. Model’s implications
5. Present day
6. References
7. Related texts
8. External links
Organized Anarchy
Organizations or decision situations characterized by problematic preferences, unclear technology, and fluid participation are known as an organized anarchy.
Problematic preferences
The organization has difficulty placing a set of changeable preferences which go hand in hand with the basic requirements for a theory of choice. It can be described better as a loose collection of ideas rather than as a coherent structure. It discovers Preferences are discovered through actions, more than actions are taken on the basis of preferences.
Unclear technology
While operating on the basis of trial and error, the processes of the business are not understood by its own members. The business strives on learning from its previous mishaps.
Fluid participation
The limitations of the organization are unclear and alterable. Therefore, participants fluctuate in the amount of energy and time they put into different domains.
Decision streams
In the garbage can model, decisions are outcomes of four independent streams within organizations.
Problems
Problems arise from both inside and outside of the organization, and for many different reasons, all consuming attention.
Solutions
Answers actively seek out questions.
Participants
Participants have other demands on their time, and actively come and go.
Choice opportunities
Choice opportunities give the organizations chances to act in ways that can be called decisions.
Early findings on the Garbage Can Model
Decision style
Decisions are made 3 ways:
· Resolution: choices resolve the problem
· Oversight: decision is taken before the problem reaches it
· Flight: decision is taken after the problem goes away
Problem activity
Problem activity reflects conflict in the organization. The problem activity is measured by:
· Number of unsolved problems
· Number of time that problems shift from one to another
· Total number of time that a problem is attached to some choice
Problem latency
A problem may be active, but not attached to any choice.
Decision maker activity
Decision maker activity can be measured by:
· Total number of time that a decision maker is attached to a choice
· Total number of times that a decision maker switches from one choice to another
· Total amount of energy available and used
· Total wasted effective energy
Decision difficulty
Decision difficulty is measured by:
· Total number of choices not made after the running period of time
· Total number of periods that a choice is active, summed over all choices
Model’s implications
The model found that, most often, decisions are not made to resolve problems. Decision making processes were found to be very sensitive to variations in load. Decision makers and problems seek each other out and continue to find each other.
There are three key aspects of the efficiency of decision process:
· Problem activity: the amount of time unresolved problems are actively attached to choice situations
· Problem latency: the amount of time problems spend activated but not linked to choices
· Decision time: the persistence of choices
The model’s processes are very interactive, and some phenomena are dependent on specific combinations of other structures at play. Important problems are more likely to be solved than unimportant ones, and important choices are less likely to solve problems than unimportant ones.
Present day
The garbage can model continues to be appear in academic articles, textbooks, and the press, being applied across diverse areas. In 2012 a volume was published celebrating 40 years since the original article’s publishment. [2]
References
1. Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative science Quarterly, 1-25
2. Lomi, A., Harrison, J. R. (2012), The Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice: Looking Forward at Forty, in Alessandro Lomi, J. Richard Harrison (ed.) The Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice: Looking Forward at Forty (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 36) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.3 - 17
Related texts
1. Bathelt, H., & Gibson, R. (2015). Learning in ‘Organized Anarchies’: The Nature of Technological Search Processes at Trade Fairs. Regional Studies, 49(6), 985-1002
2. Fioretti, G., & Lomi, A. (2008). The garbage can model of organizational choice: An agent-based reconstruction. Simulation Modelling Practice And Theory, 16(Simulating Organisational Processes), 192-217.
3. Fioretti, G., & Lomi, A. (2010). Passing the buck in the garbage can model of organizational choice. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 16(2), 113-143.
4. Martin, J. (1981). A garbage can model of the psychological research process. American Behavioral Scientist, 25(2), 131-151.
5. McFarland, Daniel and Charles Gomez. (2013). Organized Anarchy, Chapter 4 (1st ed). Organizational Analysis (53 - 71)
6. Nobuyuki, I. (2015). Garbage Can Code: Mysteries in the Original Simulation Model. Annals Of Business Administrative Science, 14(1), 15-34
7. Steen, J., Ford, J. A., & Verreynne, M. (2017). Symbols, Sublimes, Solutions, and Problems: A Garbage Can Model of Megaprojects. Project Management Journal, 48(6), 117-131.
8. Troitzsch, K. G. (2008). The garbage can model of organisational behaviour: A theoretical reconstruction of some of its variants. Simulation Modelling Practice And Theory, 16(Simulating Organisational Processes), 218-230.
9. Zhu, Y., & Kindarto, A. (2016). A garbage can model of government IT project failures in developing countries: The effects of leadership, decision structure and team competence. Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), 629-637.
External links
1. Hollands, F., Griffin, A., Saxberg, B. (2017, July 10). “Analysis: Ed tech decision makers are under pressure in higher education”. The 74 million. Retrieved from https://www.the74million.org/article/analysis-ed-tech-decision-makers-are-under-pressure-in-higher-education/
2. Menon, T. (2016, September 26). “Macromanagement is just as bad as micromanagement”. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/ideacast/2016/09/macromanagement-is-just-as-bad-as-micromanagement.html
3. ScroogeMC (2016, December 20). “AMZN stock: Why Amazon.com Inc’s disruption phase is over now”. Amigo Bulls. Retrieved from https://amigobulls.com/articles/amzn-stock-why-the-disruption-is-over-for-amazon-com-inc
4. Teferra, D. (2014, July 18). “‘Organized anarchy’ – The enduring paradigm of university management”. University World News. Retrieved from http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20140716075612402