The pros and cons of the advisory system often reveal the clues of the individual’s style in policy making

The pros and cons of the advisory system often reveal the clues of the individual’s style in policy making.Whether a decision-maker elected or constructed an authoritarian regime, they cannot be an expert on every social issue. Therefore, this policy maker is usually surrounded by an expert group named the advisory group that allows the decision-making process more efficient in a flow of numerous issues. Since decision-makers adopt a different advisory system based on their preference of organizational structure.

The formalistic approach is the advisory system favored by policymakers who endeavor to make for an orderly decision process (Breuning, 2007). The approach is advantageous when decision-making is relatively prompt. Advice that reaches the decision-maker is usually censored by the leader of the department, there is less chance of dispute over the advice. However, most formalistic decision-making is established in the bureaucratic system, there exists an inherent hierarchy between advisors. Leaders of the bureaucratic system often screen out decisions that reach the decision-maker. This censorship limits the options of decision-makers and leads to the distortion of the decisions.

On the other hand, the competitive approach is the advisory system chosen by policymakers who rather like to use multiple channels of information that can avoid distortion. There is little cooperation between advisors in this type of advisory system (Breuning, 2007). This allows more variety of information that reaches the decision-maker. This system, however, has the drawback of eliciting conflicts between the experts and may result in biased information of high staff turnover.

Breuning, M. (2007). Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction (2007th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.