The actual evaluation can change from person to person. some will have more of a need to a clear and simple decision making process, that needs minimum intervention from the participants. Usually conservatives and action driven personalities, will favor the more simple system of decision making with less participation. Others may want a more complex and subtle and participatory decision making, due to their need to explore and experience before omitting to actions. These will be usually liberals and especially people with ADD. A more complex account of the benefits and investment are describe in "[[Participation function|participation function]]"". When a a group is trying to decide the legitimacy of decision system, it will evaluate it according to the ability the system to benefit individuals and coalitions in the group.

When a a group is trying to decide the legitimacy of decision system, it will evaluate it according to the ability the system to benefit individuals and coalitions in the group. For instance, if a minority-elite members will feel that the decision that was taken by the state decision systems produce for the produced conditions that cause their ROI to be smaller then they could achieve if they have a state of their own, or if they feel that their ROI is negative, while the majority-elite members has positive ROI, they will try to influence the decision making process,and if they will fill that they are unable to influance itinfluence the decisions, they will delegitimize the state's systems of decision making, in the eyes of the minority members. Wide scale deliberation is one of the ways to achieve decisions. It's usually more consuming on human resources. In today's technology and methods of deliberation, a lot of time and effort is needed to achieve conclusive and inclusive decisions by the citizens.