UPI Study › Courses › Foundations of Leadership › Free lessons › Lesson 7.6 Free with a free account
The Administrative Model
Foundations of Leadership · Chapter 7: Decision-Making ModuleSection 7.6 · lesson 43 of 9011 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Foundations of Leadership.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Foundations of Leadership
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: The Garbage Can Model →← The Incremental ModelNext lesson: The Garbage Can Model →
In this lesson
Bounded rationality - and why stopping the search early is the rational thing to do.
- Define bounded rationality and its three constraints
- Distinguish satisficing from optimising
- Trace intelligence, design, choice and review
- Explain why organisations exist, on Simon's account
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,388 words). Read along, or search it.
Decision-Making Module
The Administrative Model
The previous section left us with a description of how administrators behave. Herbert Simon asked a harder question underneath it. Not what decision-makers do, but what they are capable of doing at all. His answer was that human decision-makers operate under bounded rationality. Cognitive capacity, available information, and time are all limited. So they cannot evaluate every alternative, or trace every consequence. What they do instead is satisfice. Searching only until they find an alternative that clears a threshold of acceptability. And then choosing it, and stopping. That idea became the dominant descriptive account of organisational decision-making. It reshaped economics, psychology, management science, and artificial intelligence.
The Critique
Not Unwilling. Unable.
Start with what Simon was arguing against. Classical economic theory in the early twentieth century treated decision-makers as fully rational agents. Capable of identifying all alternatives, and knowing all consequences. And then selecting whichever option maximised utility. Simon was trained in political science, and worked at Carnegie Mellon. What he observed did not fit that description at all. The administrators he watched made decisions that were faster, narrower, and less consistent. Less consistent than the classical model predicted. And yet reliable enough to keep genuinely complex organisations running. That combination is the puzzle the administrative model was built to solve. He set the argument out in Administrative Behavior, in nineteen forty-seven. And in a long series of papers that earned him the Nobel Prize in Economics in nineteen seventy-eight.
Three Bounds
Where Rationality Actually Runs Out
Simon's explanation was that human cognition is bounded in three distinct ways. First, cognitive limits. Working memory holds only a handful of items at once, and serial processing is slow. Second, information limits. Much of what would be needed to make an optimal decision is simply unavailable. Or it arrives too late to be of use. Third, time limits. Most decisions must be made under deadlines that preclude exhaustive search. Notice what kind of claim this is. These are properties of the decision situation, not defects of the individual. No amount of effort, training, or raw intelligence removes them. That is the work the word bounded is doing.
Satisficing
Search Until Good Enough, Then Stop
Faced with those limits, decision-makers do not maximise. They satisfice. A satisficer establishes an aspiration level. A good enough threshold. Then searches alternatives until one meets that threshold. And stops. Satisficing is routinely mischaracterised as a failure of rationality. Simon's deeper point is that it is a different kind of rationality. One that takes the cost of decision-making itself into account. Searching further consumes time, attention, and money. So a rational decision-maker in the fullest sense should stop searching at a specific point. When the marginal cost of further search exceeds the marginal benefit of a better option. For most real decisions, that point arrives long before all alternatives have been considered. The chosen alternative is therefore rarely optimal. It is usually adequate. And the cost saved by not searching further is, on average, larger than what searching would have gained. So satisficing is not a departure from rationality. It is a recognition of the resources under which rationality is actually exercised.
Four Phases
Intelligence, Design, Choice - and Back Again
Simon described decision-making as unfolding through three phases, and later four. The intelligence phase scans the environment for problems and opportunities needing attention. That is broadly the work of noticing that a decision is needed at all. The design phase develops, modifies, and evaluates possible courses of action. It is the analytic core of the process. The choice phase selects among the alternatives that the design phase produced. And Simon later added a fourth phase. Review. It evaluates past choices, and feeds learning back into future intelligence. Now the important qualification. Simon insisted the phases are not strictly sequential. Decision-makers loop between them constantly. Discovering in design that the problem was misframed. Or in choice that more alternatives are needed.
The Constraint
Each Phase Is Bounded Differently
What makes the four phases worth memorising is that each one is bounded differently. In the intelligence phase, the binding constraint is limited attention. Signals get missed, not misjudged. The problem never reaches anyone's desk. In the design phase, the constraint is limited cognitive capacity. Search gets truncated, so alternatives that were never generated cannot be chosen. In the choice phase, the constraint is limited consistency. The decision-maker satisfices rather than optimises. And in the review phase, the constraint is limited recall, and biased interpretation. That last one is easy to underrate. An organisation can run a review honestly and still remember the wrong lesson from it.
The Corollary
Why Organisations Exist at All
Simon drew a corollary from all this that he developed at length. If individuals are boundedly rational, then organisations exist partly to extend rationality. Beyond what any single person could achieve alone. Three implications follow from that. Specialisation allows different decision-makers to focus on narrower problem domains. Deepening expertise within the bounds of individual attention. Hierarchy escalates problems that exceed a lower-level decision-maker's capacity. Passing them to people whose responsibility and information allow better choices. And standard operating procedures encode the lessons of past decisions. So routine problems get solved without re-deliberating them every time. Organisations, in Simon's view, are computational systems. They distribute and structure decision-making across many bounded individuals. Which reframes organisational structure entirely. It is not bureaucracy for its own sake. It is cognition, arranged.
Case
Fourteen Hundred Applications, Two Weeks
A concrete instance, from a mid-sized software firm in Hyderabad. In twenty twenty-four it faced fourteen hundred applications for a senior engineering role. A fully rational selection process would have evaluated every candidate on every relevant dimension. That was simply impossible against the team's two-week deadline. So the hiring committee adopted an explicit satisficing protocol. An aspiration level was set in three terms. Years of experience, domain match, and a coding-screen score. Applications were reviewed in the order received. And the first candidate meeting all three thresholds was advanced to interview. After interviewing five candidates, three met the interview threshold. The committee selected the strongest of those three. The chosen candidate was almost certainly not the best in the applicant pool. But the process delivered a qualified hire in eleven days, at modest cost. Satisficing is not laziness. It is search-cost management, with its price stated openly.
The Descendants
Heuristics, and the Biases That Come With Them
Simon's framework opened the door to what became behavioural decision research. The logic runs directly from bounded rationality. If decision-makers cannot search exhaustively, they must rely on mental shortcuts. Heuristics, which focus attention and structure choice. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky documented these from the nineteen seventies onward. And showed that heuristics, while generally useful, also produce systematic biases. Availability bias overweights recent or vivid information. Representativeness bias mistakes superficial similarity for underlying probability. And anchoring bias tethers judgements to arbitrary reference points. The critical thing is what these biases are not. They are not failures of effort, or of intelligence. They are the predictable consequence of the same bounded rationality Simon identified. Modern management training in debiasing is a direct descendant of that nineteen forty-seven critique.
Legacy
How Radical It Was, and How Invisible It Became
The administrative model has had perhaps the broadest influence of any theory of decision-making. It reshaped organisation theory, by treating organisations as information-processing systems. It reshaped economics, by introducing bounded rationality into formal models of choice. It reshaped psychology, by providing the framework in which heuristics research developed. And it reshaped artificial intelligence, a field Simon co-founded. It inspired the search-based architectures that underpinned early AI systems. The central insight is that real decision-making is bounded search, not perfect optimisation. That claim is now so widely accepted it is sometimes taught as common sense. Which is worth pausing on. Being taught as common sense obscures how radical the claim was when Simon first made it.
Consolidate
Satisficing in Its Purest Form
Emergency medicine shows the model operating under the worst conditions available. Emergency physicians work under exactly what Simon described. High cognitive load, partial information, and severe time pressure. Research on diagnostic decisions in emergency departments finds a consistent pattern. Experienced clinicians do not exhaustively work through differential diagnoses. They pattern-match against a small set of likely diagnoses. They run targeted tests to discriminate between those. And they treat the first diagnosis that meets a threshold of plausibility. That is satisficing in its purest form. Despite departing from textbook rationality, it produces accurate diagnoses in the great majority of cases. But the failure mode is specific, and so is the remedy. Recent efforts add structured second look checks to emergency workflow. Those are attempts to install a Simon-style review phase. To catch precisely the cases where rapid satisficing went wrong.
About Foundations of Leadership at UPI Study
Foundations of Leadership (Business 205) is a self-paced online course of 90 video lessons in 12 chapters, from the roots of leadership theory and the trait, situational and transformational approaches to power, decision-making, communication, teams, conflict, diversity and global leadership. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Business courses Every course with PRO →
Compare: Management and leadership courses · Foundations of Leadership vs Leadership and OB
Why take it here
Why students take Foundations of Leadership with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Foundations of Leadership carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About The Administrative Model
What is bounded rationality in decision making?
What is the difference between satisficing and optimizing?
What are Herbert Simon's phases of decision making?
How do organizations help overcome bounded rationality?
About the Foundations of Leadership course
How many college credits is Foundations of Leadership?
How much does Foundations of Leadership cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Foundations of Leadership take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Foundations of Leadership.
90 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →