Bureaucratic Politics Model
Updated 2026-08-09
INTRODUCTION
English translation pending.
CORE DEFINITION
Introduced by Graham Allison in Essence of Decision, the model holds that policy is not the product of a single rational actor but of negotiation, compromise, and coalition building among organizations with separate interests. Where an official sits determines what they advocate, a pattern captured by Miles's law. The core claim is that organizational position explains positions better than strategic logic. The qualification is that the model describes a tendency and does not exclude coherent strategy in some decisions.
SCAFFOLDING EFFECT
Reduce cognitive load
- Use Actor Inventory: List the departments involved and their separate interests and performance measures. - Use Equilibrium Reading: Interpret the final decision as the balance point among those competing interests. - Use Veto Mapping: Identify who can block, who can approve, and where the real decision is settled.
Anchor fast decisions
Each organization develops a perspective shaped by its mission, expertise, and budget, so its recommendations track its position rather than a shared objective. Final decisions emerge from negotiation and coalition building among these positions, which is why outcomes appear inconsistent when read as the product of one rational plan. The apparent incoherence is the visible trace of an internal power balance.
MINIMUM ACTION
In progress 0/1Practice this model in one real situation:
account_treeGenealogyexpand_more
menu_bookReferencesexpand_more
Source support: Explicit
- en.wikipedia.orghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essence_of_Decisionverified
PRIVATE NOTES · Only visible to you
SAVED Q&A
ENTRY Q&A · Private saving available
Ask with a clear boundary
thinkingmodels answers from published entry context only.
Your question is sent to thinkingmodels. The answer uses public entry context only.
RELATED MODELS