The Multiple Perspective Concept: Bridging the Gap Between Analysts and Decisionmakers

  • Harold A. Linstone
Conference paper
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (volume 4)


Modern systems analysis really began as “scientific management” with Frederick Taylor in 1911, gathered steam with World War II’s operations research, and was propelled forward by complex weapon system design and strategic analysis in the 1950s. It then burst full force onto the national scene with RAND’s systems analysts in the early 1960s. By 1967, Max Ways wrote in FORTUNE’S survey “The Road to 1977”:

The further advance of this new style (systems analysis) is the most significant prediction that can be made about the next ten years. By 1977, this new way of dealing with the future will be recognized at home and abroad as a salient American characteristic. (1967: 94)


Natural Rubber Technology Assessment Multiple Perspective Federal Emergency Management Agency Core Assumption 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allison, G. (1969) “Conceptual Models of the Cuban Missile Crisis,” The American Political Science Review, 63 (3), September, 689–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allison, G. (1971) Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.Google Scholar
  3. Andersen, D.F. (1977) Mathematical Models and Decisionmaking in Bureaucracies: A Case Story Told from Three Points of View. MIT: PhD Dissertation (August).Google Scholar
  4. Ascher, W. (1978) Forecasting: An Appraisal for Policymakers and Planners. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Borsting, J.R. (1982) “Decisionmaking at the Top,” Management Science. 28 (4), 341–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brim, O. Jr., David C. Glass, David E. Lavin, and N. Goodman (1962) Personality and Decision Processes: Studies in the Social Psychology of Thinking. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Covello, V. (1983) “The Perception of Technological Risks: An Overview,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 23 (4).Google Scholar
  8. Fallows, J. (1981) National Defense. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  9. Fischhoff, B. (1980) quoted in “Risk Assessment’s Role in Regulation Debated,” Chemical and Engineering News. (Oct. 20), 30.Google Scholar
  10. Fischhoff, B., S. Lichtenstein, P. Slovic, S.L. Derby, and R.L. Keeney (1981) Acceptable Risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Foster. K., et al. (1980) A Sociotechnical Survey of Guayule Rubber Commercialization. Tucson. AZ: University of Arizona. Office of Arid Lands Studies; Kansas City. MO: Midwest Research Inst. ( April).Google Scholar
  12. Halal, W.C. (1980) Strategic Planning in Major U.S. Corporations. Study prepared for the General Motors Corporation at George Washington University, Washington. D.C.Google Scholar
  13. Hayes, R.H. and W.J. Abernathy (1980) “Managing Our Way to Economic Decline.” Harvard Business Review. 58 (4) (July–August), 67–77.Google Scholar
  14. Hoos, I. (1979) “Societal Aspects of Technology Assessment.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 13 (3), 191–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jay, A. (1968) Management and Machiavelli. New York: Holt. Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  16. Linstone, H.A. (1969) “When is a Need a Need?” Technological Forecasting, 1 (1), 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Linstone, H.A. et al. (1981a) “The Multiple Perspective Concept,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 20 (4), 275–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Linstone, H.A., et al. (1981b) The Multiple Perspective Concept, Report 81 - 1, Portland State University. Portland. OR: Futures Research Institute.Google Scholar
  19. Linstone, H.A., et al. (1981c) Technology Assessment of National Hydropower Development. 1. Fort Belvoir: Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, by Nero and Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  20. Magaziner, I.C. and R.B. Reich (1982) Minding America’s Business: The Decline and Rise of the American Economy. New York: Harcourt Brace Janovich.Google Scholar
  21. Martino, J.P. (1972) Technological Forecasting for Decisionmaking. New York: American Elsevier Publishing CoGoogle Scholar
  22. McNaugher, T.L. (1980) “Marksmanship, McNamara, and the M-16 Rifle: Innovation in Military Organizations,” Public Policy. 28 (Winter), 1.Google Scholar
  23. McPhee, J. (1981) “Minihydro.” The New Yorker. LVII (1), 44–87.Google Scholar
  24. Meltsner, A.J. (1977) Seismic Safety of Existing Buildings and Incentives for Hazard Mitigation in San Francisco: An Exploratory Study (Report to NSF). UCB/EERC-77/28. Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California (December).Google Scholar
  25. Morison, E.E. (1966) Men, Machines, and Modern Times. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Nehnevajsa, S. and J. Menkes (1981) “Technology Assessment and Risk Analysis,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 19 (3), 245–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Otway, H.J., P.D. Pahner, and J. Linnerooth (1975) “Societal Values in Risk Acceptance,” presented at American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Boston, Sept. 1975 (also IIASA Report RM-75-54).Google Scholar
  28. Project MIRAGE 85 (1970) III, DPR-87. Burbank, CA: Corporate Development Planning Dept., Lockheed Aircraft Corp. April.Google Scholar
  29. Rowe, V. (1959) The Great Wall of France. London: Putnam Press.Google Scholar
  30. Schwebs, D. and P. Sprey (1981) ( Formerly OASD/Systems Analysis). Oral communication.Google Scholar
  31. Slovic, P., B. Fischhoff, and S. Lichtenstein (1981) Facts and Fears: Understanding Perceived Risk. Eugene, OR: Decision Research Inc. (manuscript).Google Scholar
  32. Steinbruner, J.D. (1968) The Mind and the Milieu of Policymakers: A Case History of the MLF. PhD Dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  33. Thompson, M. (1982) “The Cultural Approach to Risk: The Case of Poverty,” in H. Kunreuther (Ed.), Risk: A Seminar Series. Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.Google Scholar
  34. Turner, B.A. (1982) “Organizational Responses to Hazard,” in H. Kunreuther (Ed.), Risk: A Seminar Series. Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.Google Scholar
  35. Tverksy, A. and K. Kahneman (1974) “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases,” Science. 185. (4157) (September 27), 1124–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Velimirovic, H. (1975) An Anthropological View of Risk Phenomena, IIASA Report RM-75-55 (Nov).Google Scholar
  37. Ways, M. (1967) “The Road to 1977,” Fortune. 75. (1) (January), 93–95, 194–195.Google Scholar
  38. Wildavsky, A. and Ellen Tenenbaum (1981) The Politics of Mistrust. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold A. Linstone
    • 1
  1. 1.Portland State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations