PART SIX DEALING WITH INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS The more important the decision to be made, the less precise are the available intellectual tools. Anonymous. The intellectual tools used in cost-benefit analysis are exceedingly well-developed. (See Part I.) But when we shift our attention to a managerial context broader than the evaluation of a specified set of alternatives, the analytic management techniques available to us appear less neat and more vague. Indeed, many of the techniques discussed here in Part Six seem to be little more than common sense -- for example, the making of lists, and the consideration of factors which anyone might discover for her/himself. In actuality, however, it is not so easy to discover these important principles by yourself even though they may seem obvious after they are presented to you. Indeed, the schema offered here have taken thousands of years to develop, and all of them have advanced greatly in recent decades. There are also a few well-worked-out and scientifically- tested management techniques, such as the tit-for-tat mode of producing cooperation. And there exists a tested body of knowledge about which kinds of organizational structures work best for systems as large as an economy. But these areas of solid knowledge are small islands rather than large continents of thought. One of the most interesting and challenging issues in management is deciding when it is best to design a system, and when it is best to let a system evolve. Even in a very small group such as a marriage, it is sometimes best to let practices evolve rather than plan them -- for example, the household division of labor between husband and wife may be affected by planning from time to time, but seems to evolve in many or most cases. Yet it seems natural to design such systems planfully. In the case of government systems, voters often demand it, though it may be counter-productive. An interesting dilemma. Page # thinking part-6@@ 3-3-4d