Saunders-SubstituteExperiencePresidents-2017

International Organization Foundation

  • Article Title: No Substitute for Experience: Presidents, Advisers, and Information in Group Decision Making

  • Author: Elizabeth N. Saunders

  • Published in: International Organization, Vol. 71, No. S1 (2017), pp. S219-S247.

  • Published by: Cambridge University Press

  • Stable URL: JSTOR

  • Access Date: 23-08-2024 20:24 UTC

Abstract

  • Focuses on the impact of individuals' traits and biases in foreign policy decisions made in groups of elites.

  • Investigates how the balance of foreign policy experience among leaders and advisers impacts decision-making in wartime.

  • Introduces three key mechanisms where leader experience influences decision-making:

    • Monitoring of advisers

    • Credibility of delegation to experienced advisers

    • Diversification of advice and preference for certain policies.

  • Uses the 1991 and 2003 Iraq Wars as case studies to illustrate findings.

Key Concepts

Group Decision Making

  • Most foreign policy decisions are made by groups, often elite decision-makers with varying experience levels.

  • Experience can have both positive (strategic thinking) and negative (overconfidence, biases) psychological effects.

  • The role of political psychology in understanding group decisions, particularly regarding biases.

Aggregation Problem

  • Examines how the biases of individuals within a group affect collective decision making.

  • Highlights the effectiveness of leaders in managing or exacerbating the biases of their advisers.

  • Questions how elite experience influences decision-making and the conditions that amplify or diminish the effects of experience.

Mechanisms of Decision-Making Bias

  • Monitoring:

    • A leader's experience affects how well they can oversee advisers.

    • Experienced leaders can better frame questions and check the work of advisers.

    • Lack of effective monitoring can lead to riskier behavior.

  • Delegation:

    • Leaders can delegate responsibilities but need to maintain control over information gathering.

    • Inexperienced leaders may facilitate delegation to advisers, inadvertently empowering them.

    • Overconfidence in advisers can arise from such delegation.

  • Diversity of Views:

    • Groups may experience polarization, leading to extreme responses.

    • Diversity in opinions can mitigate risks but inexperienced leaders may inadvertently marginalize dissenting voices.

Case Studies

Comparison of 1991 and 2003 Iraq Wars

  • 1991 Iraq War:

    • George H.W. Bush's extensive foreign policy experience informed and moderated decision-making.

    • Effective monitoring and control over advisers led to prudent assessments of risks.

    • Key decisions were influenced by Powell and other advisers but maintained a clear leadership structure.

  • 2003 Iraq War:

    • George W. Bush's lack of foreign policy experience led to poorer monitoring and increased risk-taking among advisers.

    • Inadequate assessment and planning linked to overarching biases, including groupthink and overconfidence.

    • The absence of a thorough examination of postwar scenarios and ambiguous leadership contributed to adverse outcomes.

Conclusion

  • The balance of experience among leaders and advisers critically influences foreign policy decision-making.

  • Experienced advisers cannot substitute the need for an experienced leader; their impact is contingent on the leader’s experience level and ability to manage biases.

  • Future research should focus on the dynamics of decision-making among individuals with varying experiences and how this translates to outcomes on the international stage.