Using organization theory to understand international organizations: Four models of multilateral decision making

International Public Management Journal

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 327-370

  Fosdick, Anna ^a  

^a NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033478724     PISSN: 10967494     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1096-7494(00)89041-8     Document Type: Article

References (138)

1. The dearth of knowledge on the functioning of international organizations is the product of two factors: 1) the overwhelming focus by international organization scholars on explaining how such entities come to be established, rather than how they work once established; and 2) the failure of international organization scholars to link their works up with the research programs and multidisciplinary insights of organizational theorists. The result is a deep chasm in our knowledge of how international organizations work, and by extension, in our understanding of the reasons they often fail to work. See Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore. "The politics, power, and pathology of international organizations." InternaTional Organization. Autumn 1999. Volume 53, No 4, pp 699-733.
2. Within the U.S., or what broadly comprises the "national level" of analysis, I interviewed Pentagon and State Department officials, Congressional sources, members of the National Security Council, academics, and journalists. At the United Nations, or what broadly comprises the "international level" of analysis, I spoke with representatives of various permanent missions to the United Nations, primarily focusing on the Permanent Five and traditional troop-contributing countries. Shifting my focus from member states to the international civil servants, I interviewed members of the U.N. Department of Peacekeeping Operations, the U.N. Department of Humanitarian Affairs, and the U.N. Department of Political Affairs. My research was further informed by discussions with representatives of non-governmental organizations and interests groups whose missions have been deeply affected by recent changes in United Nations peacekeeping. As a result of peacekeeping's controversial nature, together with the constraints which all but the highest ranking officials face with regard to speaking "on the record," virtually all of my more than sixty interviewees insisted that I safeguard their anonymity. Most however, have allowed me to associate their agency or organization with the information and opinions revealed in the interview.
3. Gareth Evans, 1993. Cooperating for Peace: The Global Agenda for the 1990s and Beyond. (St. Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin), pp 124, 119.
4. Sarah Doyle, Kimberly Smith, and Kemper Vest, 1994. The Changing Shape of PeacekeepIng. Conference Report sponsored by the Center for National Security Negotiations of Science Applications International Corporation; (14-15 June), p C2.
5. William J. Durch, Ed.,1993. The Evolution of UN Peacekeeping: Case Studies and Comparative Analysis. (New York: St Martin's Press), pp 9, 463.
6. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, 1992/1993 "Empowering the United Nations." Foreign Affairs, 71, (Winter): 89-90.
7. Leroy A. Bennett, 1977. International Organizations: Principles and Issues. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.), p 132.
8. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, 1995. Supplement to an Agenda for Peace: Position Paper of the Secretary-General on the Occasion of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the United Nations. A/50/60-S/1995/1, (3 January): 9.
9. Sir Anthony Parsons, 1992. "The United Nations in the post-cold war era." International Relations, XI/3, (December): 189-200.
10. Evans, Cooperating for Peace: The Global Agenda for the 1990s and Beyond, p 106.
11. Interview, July 18, 1995.
12. Durch, Ed., The Evolution of UN Peacekeeping: Case Studies and Comparative Analysis, p 10.
13. Interview with a New York diplomat, June 16, 1995.
14. James G. March and Johan P. Olsen, 1988. "The uncertainty of the past: Organizational learning under ambiguity." Pp. 336-7 in James G. March, ed. Decisions and Organizations. (New York: Basil Blackwell).
15. Harold L. Wilensky, 1967. Organizational Intelligence: Knowledge and Policy in Government and Industry. (New York: Basic Books), p 7.
16. James G. March and Johan P. Olsen, Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations, (1979 (1976)), p 60.
17. Barbara Levitt and James G. March, 1988. "Organizational learning." Annual Review of Sociology. 14: 319.
18. Barbara Levitt and James G. March, 1990. "Chester I. Barnard and the intelligence of learning." P 19 in Oliver E. Williamson, ed. Organization Theory: From Chester Barnard to the Present and Beyond. (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
19. Levitt and March, "Organizational Learning," p 323.
20. Ernst B. Haas, 1991. "Collective learning: Some theoretical speculations." Pp. 62-99 in George W. Breslauer and Philip E. Tetlock eds., Learning in U.S. and Soviet Foreign Policy. (Boulder: Westview Press).
21. James G. March, Ed., 1988. Decisions and Organizations. (New York: Basil Blackwell), p 13.
22. Gareth Morgan, 1986. Images of Organization. (Newbury Park: Sage Publications), p 89.
23. Wilensky, Organizational Intelligence: Knowledge and Policy in Government and Industry, p 41.
24. The tendency to inappropriately characterize peacekeeping as a "Chapter VI" or "Chapter VII" activity was confirmed during the 63 interviews I conducted in the summer of 1995. Decision makers rarely invoked the term "Chapter VI and one-half" to refer to traditional peacekeeping, or the terms "Chapter VI and three-quarters" or "Chapter VI and seven-eighths" to refer to robust peacekeeping.
25. Interview, June 13, 1995.
26. Interview, July 13, 1995.
27. Interview with Congressional source, July 13, 1995.
28. Interview, June 8, 1995.
29. Interview, July 17, 1995.
30. Interview, June 20, 1995.
31. Paul F. Diehl, 1993. International Peacekeeping. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press).
32. Interview, June 21, 1995.
33. March and Olsen, "The Uncertainty of the Past: Organizational Learning under Ambiguity," p 343.
34. Interview, July 19, 1995.
35. Interview, July 17, 1995.
36. Interview, July 17, 1995.
37. Interview, June 12, 1995.
38. Interview, July 18, 1995.
39. Interview, June 13, 1995.
40. Interview, June 20, 1995.
41. Interview, July 19, 1995.
42. Interview, June 12, 1995.
43. Boulding in Janis, Irving L. and Leon Mann, 1977. Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice, and Commitment. (New York: The Free Press).
44. Ibid., p 35.
45. Simon, Herbert A., 1976 (1945). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. (New York: The Free Press.) Simon used the term "bounded rationality" to capture the limited capacity of human beings to formulate and solve complex problems in a manner approximating that necessary to achieve objectively rational behavior. "Satisficing," or the making of choices absent a full delineation and examination of alternatives, occurs as a result of man's boundedly rational nature. Decision makers tend to settle for courses of action that fit simple rules of thumb and are "good enough" because as human beings, "they have not the wits to maximize."
46. Lindblom, Charles E. (1959) 1982. "The science of "muddling through." Pp. 113-127 in Stella Z. Theodoulou and Matthew A. Cahn, eds., Public Policy: The Essential Readings, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. According to Lindblom, "incrementalism" is a decision strategy policy makers use to avoid departing grandly from previous policies or former paths of implementation. Apprehensive about the consequences of new programs, policy makers consider alternatives that differ to only a small degree from existing policy. In Lindblom's classic phrasing, decisionmakers "muddle through."
47. Ibid.
48. Interview, July 14, 1995.
49. Interview, June 12, 1995.
50. Interview, July 17, 1995.
51. Interview, July 18, 1995.
52. Michael Barnett, 1995. "Partners in peace? The UN, regional organizations, and peacekeeping." Review of International Studies, 21: 411-33.
53. United States Institute of Peace. The Professionalization of Peacekeeping. A Study Group Report. 2nd printing. January 1994, p v.
54. Morgan, Images of Organization, p 336.
55. Interview, June 20, 1995.
56. Interview, June 16, 1995.
57. Diehl, International Peacekeeping, p 166.
58. Brian Urquhart, 1990. Beyond the 'sheriff's posse.' Survival, 32/3 (May/June 1990): 196.
59. See Barnett, "Partners in Peace? The UN, Regional Organizations, and Peace-keeping," and Diehl, International Peacekeeping.
60. See Barnett, "Partners in Peace? The UN, Regional Organizations, and Peace-keeping," and Diehl, International Peacekeeping.
61. Interview, June 21, 1995.
62. Interview, June 6, 1995.
63. Interview, July 10, 1995.
64. Interview, July 17, 1995.
65. Interview, June 15, 1995.
66. Chester I. Barnard, 1938. The Functions of the Executive, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University), p 282.
67. Philip Selznick, 1949. The TVA and the Grass Roots: A Study of Politics and Organization. (University of California Press), p 47.
68. Ibid., p 47.
69. Terry M. Moe, 1989. "The politics of bureaucratic structure." Pp. 282 in John E. Chubb and Paul E. Peterson, eds., Can the Government Govern? (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution).
70. Inis L. Claude, Jr., 1956, 1964. Swords into Plowshares. (New York: Random House, 3rd edition (revised)), p 404.
71. Ibid., p 4-5.
72. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, 1992. "An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-keeping." (U.N. document A/47/277-S/24111).
73. Brian Urquhart, 1994. "Who can police the world?" The New York Review of Books, XLI/9 (May 12, 1994): 29.
74. "Excerpts from Dole's speech on the president's foreign policy." The New York Times. June 26, 1996, A10.
75. Jesse Helms, 1996. "Saving the U.N.: A challenge to the next secretary-general." Foreign Affairs, 75/5 (September/October, 1996): 2.
76. Interview, July 19, 1995.
77. Interview, July 19, 1995.
78. Interview, July 13, 1995.
79. United Nations Security Council, 1992. "Statement by the President of the Security Council." U.N. Document S/23500, 31 January 1992.
80. Interview with a member of the New Zealand Mission to the U.N., June 13, 1995.
81. Evans, Cooperating for Peace: The Global Agenda for the 1990s and Beyond, p xi.
82. United Nations Security Council. "Statement[s] by the President of the Security Council." U.N. Documents, S/25344, S/24728. S/25036, S/24872, S/25184, S/25859.
83. Boutros-Ghali, Boutros, 1992. An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-keeping, U.N. document A/47/277-S/24111, paragraph 15.
84. Ibid., paragraphs 8, 86.
85. Interview, June 20, 1995.
86. Interview, June 14, 1995.
87. Interview, June 7, 1995.
88. Boutros-Ghali, "Empowering the United Nations," p 89.
89. Boutros-Ghali, Boutros, 1996. "Global leadership after the cold war." Foreign Affairs, 75 (March/April 1996): 88-98.
90. Philip Selznick, 1957. Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation. (New York: Harper & Row).
91. Interview, July 19, 1995.
92. Selznick, Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation, p 62.
93. Interview, June 15, 1995.
94. Inis L. Claude, Jr., 1996. "Peace and security: Prospective roles for the two United Nations." Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism in International Organizations, 2/3 (Sept-Dec): 291.
95. William L. Tung, 1969. International Organization under the United Nations System. (New York: The Thomas Y. Crowell Company).
96. Indar Jit Rikhye, Michael Harbottle, and Bjorn Egge, 1974. The Thin Blue Line: International Peacekeeping and its Future. (New Haven: Yale University Press).
97. Hans J. Morgenthau, 1948, 1985. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.).
98. Claude, Swords into Plowshares, p 10.
99. Interview, June 12, 1995.
100. Interview, July 18, 1995.
101. Interview, June 16, 1995.
102. Interview, June 20, 1995.
103. Interview, June 14, 1995.
104. Interview with a member of the New Zealand Mission to the U.N., June 13, 1995.
105. Interview with a State Department official, July 10, 1995.
106. Interview with a State Department official, July 10, 1995.
107. Interview, June 7, 1995.
108. Interview, July 10, 1995.
109. Interview, June 8, 1995.
110. Evans, Cooperating for Peace: The Global Agenda for the 1990s and Beyond, p 109.
111. Interview, July 14, 1995.
112. Interview, July 19, 1995.
113. Interview, June 13, 1995.
114. Interview, June 9, 1995.
115. Interview, June 12, 1995.
116. Interview, June 16, 1995.
117. Interview, July 12, 1995.
118. Interview with a member of the U.S. Mission to the U.N., June 8, 1995.
119. Interview, June 8, 1995.
120. Interview, June 13, 1995.
121. Barnett, "Partners in Peace? The UN, Regional Organizations, and Peace-keeping," p 428.
122. Interview, July 10, 1995.
123. Interview, June 8, 1995.
124. Interview, July 18, 1995.
125. Interview, June 21, 1995.
126. Interview with a State Department official, July 17, 1995.
127. Interview with a State Department official, July 10, 1995.
128. Interview with a New York diplomat, June 16, 1995.
129. Interview with a former National Security Council official, July 19, 1995.
130. Interview with a member of the French Mission to the U.N., June 12, 1995.
131. Interview with a New York diplomat, June 20, 1995.
132. Interview, June 9, 1995.
133. Peter M. Haas and Ernst B. Haas, 1995. "Learning to learn: Improving international governance." Global Governance, 1/3, (Sept-Dec.): 256.
134. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the institution with which she is affiliated.
135. Terry M. Moe, 1990. "The politics of structural choice: Toward a theory of public bureaucracy." Pp. 149 in Oliver E. Williamson, ed. Organization Theory: From Chester Barnard to the Present and Beyond. (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
136. Ibid., p 117.
137. Allison, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. While Realists and Neo-Realists have denied the relevance of international organizations, Neo-Liberals have tended to focus on the mere existence of the international organizations, to the neglect of far more interesting questions about their functioning. See Barnett and Finnemore (1998 manuscript); and Michael Barnett. "International Relations Theory and the United Nations: Continued Indifference or Potential Renaissance?" (1996 manuscript).
138. Jonathan Bendor and Thomas H. Hammond, 1992. "Rethinking Allison's models." American Political Science Review, 86/2 (June): 301. Allison's examination of standard operating procedures and political bargaining comprised a milestone in examining foreign policy decision making; but as Allison stressed in his 1971 classic, organization theory holds further insights for scholars of international relations.