DEDDY S. BRATAKUSUMAH PhD 2007

Presentasi berjudul: "DEDDY S. BRATAKUSUMAH PhD 2007"— Transcript presentasi:

1 DEDDY S. BRATAKUSUMAH PhD 2007
TEORI PENGAMBILAN KEPUTUSAN DALAM KEBIJAKAN PUBLIK (DECISION MAKING THEORY IN PUBLIC POLICY) DEDDY S. BRATAKUSUMAH PhD 2007

2 DEFINISI Rational decisions are ones that advances the welfare of the decision maker effectively and logically based on everything the decision maker knows and feels (Brown, 2005) Rational decision making involves the selection of the alternative which will maximize the decision-maker’s values, the selection being made following a comprehensive analysis of alternatives and their consequences (Simon, 1957)

3 KRITERIA Didasarkan pada modal yang dimiliki oleh si pengambil keputusan. Modal disini bukanlah harta atau uang semata, tetapi keadaan mental, kemampuan mental, hubungan sosial, dan perasaan. Didasarkan pada berbagai kemungkinan akibat dari pilihan. Manakala akibat ini tidak pasti, maka akibat ini dianalisa dengan memakai teori probabilitas. Pilihlah yang probabilitasnya sesuai dengan yang diharapkan pada setiap pilihan. (Hastie & Dawes, 2001)

4 MASALAH-MASALAH PADA METODA KUALITATIF
Heuristics: Speculative formulation serving as a guide in the investigation or solution of a problem (Keren and Teigen, 2004) Representation Bias: decision making by recalling a memory or experience that is similar to the present decision making experience Availability Bias: decision making by the primacy and/or by predicting “easily conceivable outcomes” Anchor & Adjustment Bias: decision making by what is familiar and conceivable

5 BERBAGAI MODEL Goals, Options and Outcomes (GOO)
The Personalist Approach Lens Model Simple Utility Equation Additive Linear Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT)

6 DEFINISI “UTILITY” “The consumption utility of an option is broadly defined here as the benefit the option delivers.” (Hsee, 1999) It is assumed that the decision maker should choose the option that delivers the greatest utility or benefit. (Hsee, 1999) When making decisions, we think about what option will derive the highest utility. (Hastie and Dawes, 2001)

7 GOALS, OPTIONS, DAN OUTCOMES
Apa Yang Kita Inginkan? (Goals) Apa Yang Bisa Kita Kerjakan? (Options) Apa Yang Mungkin Akan Terjadi? (Outcomes) (Brown, 2005) Prakteknya Goals dan Options dapat diuraikan Outcomes sulit untuk diperkirakan Bisa memakai Quantitative Methods (Simple Probability Theory), (Penelitian mengindikasikan bahwa Quantitative Methods memprediksi Outcomes lebih baik daripada Qualitative Methods) (Hastie & Dawes, 2001)

8 THE PERSONALIST APPROACH (first approximation of quantifiable decision making)
OPTIONS OUTCOMES Science Liberal Arts Class enjoyment - - Academic success + Career security + + Total (Brown, 2005)

9 LENS MODEL CONCEPT The decision maker is trying to see a “distal” true state of something through a “proximal lens” of cues. These cues represent information or characteristics that the decision maker uses to make a decision (Hastie and Dawes, 2001) An algebraic model of probability that measures and assigns a scaled weight to the importance of each piece of information (cue) available to the decision maker

10 LENS MODEL CONCEPT Research: “experts correctly select variables that are important in making predictions, but that a probability model combines these variables in a way that is superior to the global judgments of these very same experts.” (Hastie and Dawes, 2001) Probability models have been derived from the Lens Model Concept.

11 SIMPLE UTILITY EQUATION
Decision tree in which each option represents a major branch, and from each branch stems the possible outcomes. Each of these outcomes is assigned a specific quantitative probability so that the sum of the outcomes stemming from one choice adds up to 1, or 100%. The probability for each outcome is multiplied by an assigned number that represents how the decision maker would feel about that outcome (Hastie and Dawes, 2001) Utility = Σ (probabilityoutcome x valueoutcome)

12 SIMPLE UTILITY EQUATION
Value Prob x Value Utility .4 -.6 Study fail .3 pass .7 fail .8 pass .2 Play

13 ADDITIVE LINEAR MULTI-ATTRIBUTE UTILITY THEORY (MAUT)
MAUT weighs all of the attributes and scales the attributes by importance to the decision maker. Each option is considered by assigning a scaled value to that option-attribute, according to its importance, and then adding up all of the scaled option-attributes to obtain the utility value for that option (Hastie and Dawes, 2001)

14 INCREMENTALISM Model lain dalam pengambilan keputusan adalah Incrementalism. Tokohnya adalah Charles Lindblom. Menurutnya kebijakan publik adalah kelanjutan dari berbagai kebijakan pemerintah sebelumnya, hanya sedikit perubahan. Incrementalism menganggap bahwa program-program, kebijakan-kebijakan, dan pengeluaran pemerintah, merupakan dasar untuk pembuatan kebijakan baru (Hill, 1997)

15 Asumsi-Asumsi Incrementalism:
Para pembuat keputusan tidak memiliki kemampuan untuk memperkirakan segala konsekwensi dari berbagai alternatif. Menerima legitimasi dari kebijakan yang terdahulu. Biaya yang terbuang menjadi pertimbangan dalam perubahan kebijakan yang radikal. Mengurangi konflik dan gejolak plitik. Karakteristik dari pembuat keputusan itu sendiri cocok dengan Incrementalism, manusia bukanlah yang senang meningkatkan “nilai”, melainkan sebagai pencari kepuasan dari kebutuhannya. (Lester ad Stewart, 2000)

16 TERIMA KASIH