94 Understanding Rational Decision Making
saw in the Dutch case, different department heads within the same organization focus on different
decision criteria while evaluating the same set of policy options. And as we saw in the Orme Dam
case, allowing external stakeholders to have a say in an organization’s policy decision can dramati-
cally affect the decision criteria and the choice of the best alternative.
TYPES OF AUDIENCE DECISIONS: IMPLICATIONS
FOR COMMUNICATORS
- The main takeaway for communicators in Chapter 2 is that audiences use variations on a
small number of decision schemata to make most of the decisions that professionals want
them to make. Thus, the audience’s information requirements are often predictable. - Use the information presented in the chapter to more quickly ascertain the content that
is appropriate for your communications. The alternative is to start from scratch when
planning the content of your documents, presentations, meetings, or interviews. - Why use the information? To save yourself time. To improve your accuracy in predicting
the information your audience requires. To persuade your audience. - To apply the information presented in the chapter: (1) Determine the type of decision
you want your audience to make; (2) Address the decision criteria and provide the bench-
marks for that type of decision; (3) Add or subtract decision criteria and other information
depending on the needs and preferences of your specific audience.
Notes
1 Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002, p. 4). Primal leadership: Learning to lead with emotional
intelligence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
2 Blakeslee, A. M. (2001). Interacting with audiences: Social influences on the production of scientific writing. Mah-
wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3 Askehave, I., & Swales, J. M. (2001). Genre identification and communicative purpose: A problem and a
possible solution. Applied Linguistics , 22 (2), 195–212.
Bhatia, V. K. (1997). Introduction: Genre analysis and world Englishes. World Englishes , 16 (3), 313–319.
Johns, A. M. (1997). Text, role and context: Developing academic literacies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Nickerson, C. (1999). The use of English in electronic mail in a multinational corporation. In F. Bargiela-
Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses (pp. 35–56). Harlow, UK:
Longman.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.
4 Martin, J. R. (1985). Process and text: Two aspects of semiosis. In J. Benson & W. Greaves (Eds.), Sys-
temic perspectives on discourse (Vol. I: Selected Theorectical Papers from the 9th International Systemic Workshop ,
pp. 248–274). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
5 Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1995, p. 13). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication : Cognition,
culture, power. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6 Beasley, R. (1998). Collective interpretations: How problem representations aggregate in foreign policy
groups. In D. Sylvan & J. Voss (Eds.), Problem representation in foreign policy decision making (pp. 80–115).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
7 Campbell, J. E. (1981). An empirical investigation of the impact on the decision processes of loan officers
of separate accounting standards for smaller and/or closely held companies (Doctoral dissertation, The
University of Tennessee, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts International , 42 (09A), 4050.
Campbell, J. E. (1984). An application of protocol analysis to the “Little GAAP” controversy. Accounting,
Organizations and Society , 9 (3–4), 329–343.