Difference between revisions of "Personal Optimising ROI Selection Criterion"
From Deliberative Democracy Institiute Wiki
(Created page with "Personal Optimising ROI Selection Criterion Is the process by which the different options evaluated by the group's members. Because deliberation is a liberal method of coordi...") |
(improved by Cluade) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Personal | + | Personal Optimizing ROI Selection Criterion Is the criterion by which the different options are evaluated by the group's members. |
| − | Because deliberation is a liberal method of coordination the liberal values are set in order to help the group choose the best option. In liberal values, every person is a free person and he is free to associate himself with any other free person. | + | ==The common good principal== |
| − | When in deliberation large amount of options are evaluated as a solution for a common issue, Some options may harm some of the individuals, While other individuals make a profit from those options. In conservative values, members may choose the "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_good common good]" principle | + | Because deliberation is a liberal method of coordination the liberal values are set in order to help the group choose the best option. In liberal values, every person is a free person and he/she is free to associate himself with any other free person. |
| + | |||
| + | When in deliberation large amount of options are evaluated as a solution for a common issue, Some options may harm some of the individuals, While other individuals make a profit from those options. In conservative values, members may choose the "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_good common good]" principle to select an option, Which means that on average most of the members profit even though a minority of members may lose. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Personal Good Principal== | ||
| + | Upholding the principles of free choice and free association, a group cannot compel a member to sacrifice their individual interests for the purported common good. An alternative criterion is required. One approach could be that the individual remains a group member and complies with group decisions, even if the current decision may result in a perceived personal loss, provided they evaluate that their long-term personal return on investment (ROI) will be positive. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Tit-for-tat== | ||
| + | The tit-for-tat theory posits that in situations involving multiple games or iterations, members will strive to select options that maximize the return on investment (ROI) for the majority while minimizing adverse impacts on those who may experience losses. This approach aims to strike a balance between collective benefit and mitigating harm, fostering cooperation and reciprocity over time. By adopting a long-term perspective and considering the interconnected nature of repeated interactions, members are incentivized to pursue decisions that yield positive outcomes for most stakeholders, thereby promoting stability and mutually beneficial outcomes within the group dynamics. | ||
| + | |||
| + | However, the theory also acknowledges that if a group consistently compromises an individual's ROI excessively, the individual may choose to leave the group. Individuals are likely to gravitate towards groups that reward them with higher ROIs, leading to an evolutionary process where groups that produce the best overall ROI outcomes for their members become more attractive and sustainable over time. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Ultimately, this dynamic creates a self-regulating system where groups that fail to balance collective and individual interests risk losing members to more rewarding alternatives. Conversely, groups that effectively maximize ROIs while minimizing harm to individuals are more likely to retain and attract members, fostering long-term success and cohesion within the group structure. | ||
| + | ==A group can exclude harming individuals, under restricted conditions== | ||
| + | In certain scenarios, an individual may join a group with the intention of contributing minimally while seeking to maximize their personal gain. To mitigate such behavior, members can collectively decide to remove individuals who are perceived as detrimental to the group's interests. However, the removal of members should be approached cautiously, especially in groups comprising diverse stakeholders. Abruptly removing a member can foster rivalry and conflict between groups, potentially escalating tensions. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Therefore, rather than resorting to immediate expulsion, it may be more prudent to engage individuals perceived as harmful in a persuasive manner. The aim should be to align their behaviors with the group's accepted principles of distributive justice, which are endorsed by the majority of members. Through open dialogue and a shared understanding of fairness, individuals can be encouraged to contribute more equitably and align their actions with the group's collective interests. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This approach not only preserves group cohesion but also fosters an environment of inclusivity and mutual understanding. By embracing principles of distributive justice and employing persuasion over exclusion, groups can navigate potential conflicts more constructively, fostering cooperation and minimizing the risk of escalating rivalries or fracturing relationships among stakeholders. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Trust== | ||
| + | As group members engage in interactions that yield favorable returns on investment (ROI), trust within the group will be strengthened. When individuals experience positive outcomes from their collaborative efforts, they are more likely to place heightened confidence and faith in the group dynamic. This elevated trust encourages members to invest greater resources, time, and energy into group endeavors, as they perceive the collective efforts as trustworthy and beneficial. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Consequently, a virtuous cycle emerges: successful interactions that generate desirable ROIs foster trust, which in turn motivates members to deepen their commitment and involvement in group activities. This increased engagement further enhances the likelihood of achieving positive outcomes, reinforcing the trust and solidifying the group's cohesion. | ||
| + | Such a dynamic not only promotes a sense of collective ownership and responsibility but also cultivates an environment where members feel empowered to contribute their best efforts, secure in the knowledge that their investments will yield fruitful returns. Ultimately, this self-reinforcing process of trust and favorable ROIs can propel groups towards sustained success, enabling them to navigate challenges more effectively and capitalize on opportunities more efficiently. | ||
[[category: definition]] | [[category: definition]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:11, 2 June 2024
Personal Optimizing ROI Selection Criterion Is the criterion by which the different options are evaluated by the group's members.
Contents
The common good principal
Because deliberation is a liberal method of coordination the liberal values are set in order to help the group choose the best option. In liberal values, every person is a free person and he/she is free to associate himself with any other free person.
When in deliberation large amount of options are evaluated as a solution for a common issue, Some options may harm some of the individuals, While other individuals make a profit from those options. In conservative values, members may choose the "common good" principle to select an option, Which means that on average most of the members profit even though a minority of members may lose.
Personal Good Principal
Upholding the principles of free choice and free association, a group cannot compel a member to sacrifice their individual interests for the purported common good. An alternative criterion is required. One approach could be that the individual remains a group member and complies with group decisions, even if the current decision may result in a perceived personal loss, provided they evaluate that their long-term personal return on investment (ROI) will be positive.
Tit-for-tat
The tit-for-tat theory posits that in situations involving multiple games or iterations, members will strive to select options that maximize the return on investment (ROI) for the majority while minimizing adverse impacts on those who may experience losses. This approach aims to strike a balance between collective benefit and mitigating harm, fostering cooperation and reciprocity over time. By adopting a long-term perspective and considering the interconnected nature of repeated interactions, members are incentivized to pursue decisions that yield positive outcomes for most stakeholders, thereby promoting stability and mutually beneficial outcomes within the group dynamics.
However, the theory also acknowledges that if a group consistently compromises an individual's ROI excessively, the individual may choose to leave the group. Individuals are likely to gravitate towards groups that reward them with higher ROIs, leading to an evolutionary process where groups that produce the best overall ROI outcomes for their members become more attractive and sustainable over time.
Ultimately, this dynamic creates a self-regulating system where groups that fail to balance collective and individual interests risk losing members to more rewarding alternatives. Conversely, groups that effectively maximize ROIs while minimizing harm to individuals are more likely to retain and attract members, fostering long-term success and cohesion within the group structure.
A group can exclude harming individuals, under restricted conditions
In certain scenarios, an individual may join a group with the intention of contributing minimally while seeking to maximize their personal gain. To mitigate such behavior, members can collectively decide to remove individuals who are perceived as detrimental to the group's interests. However, the removal of members should be approached cautiously, especially in groups comprising diverse stakeholders. Abruptly removing a member can foster rivalry and conflict between groups, potentially escalating tensions.
Therefore, rather than resorting to immediate expulsion, it may be more prudent to engage individuals perceived as harmful in a persuasive manner. The aim should be to align their behaviors with the group's accepted principles of distributive justice, which are endorsed by the majority of members. Through open dialogue and a shared understanding of fairness, individuals can be encouraged to contribute more equitably and align their actions with the group's collective interests.
This approach not only preserves group cohesion but also fosters an environment of inclusivity and mutual understanding. By embracing principles of distributive justice and employing persuasion over exclusion, groups can navigate potential conflicts more constructively, fostering cooperation and minimizing the risk of escalating rivalries or fracturing relationships among stakeholders.
Trust
As group members engage in interactions that yield favorable returns on investment (ROI), trust within the group will be strengthened. When individuals experience positive outcomes from their collaborative efforts, they are more likely to place heightened confidence and faith in the group dynamic. This elevated trust encourages members to invest greater resources, time, and energy into group endeavors, as they perceive the collective efforts as trustworthy and beneficial.
Consequently, a virtuous cycle emerges: successful interactions that generate desirable ROIs foster trust, which in turn motivates members to deepen their commitment and involvement in group activities. This increased engagement further enhances the likelihood of achieving positive outcomes, reinforcing the trust and solidifying the group's cohesion. Such a dynamic not only promotes a sense of collective ownership and responsibility but also cultivates an environment where members feel empowered to contribute their best efforts, secure in the knowledge that their investments will yield fruitful returns. Ultimately, this self-reinforcing process of trust and favorable ROIs can propel groups towards sustained success, enabling them to navigate challenges more effectively and capitalize on opportunities more efficiently.