On the other hand, there are some drawbacks associated with using the paternalistic approach to decision-making. For one thing, this type of model does not consider or take into account any opinions or perspectives from those people who would actually be impacted by a given decision. Additionally, since all power lies in the hands of one person, this can lead to issues such as bias or favoritism when decisions are being made. This could ultimately lead to unfairness within certain communities or organizations if authority figures make biased choices based on their own preferences rather than what may actually be best for everyone involved.

Informative Decision Making: Pros and Cons

The informative decision making model focuses on providing individuals with accurate information and data so that they can make informed choices about a particular issue or situation. In contrast to paternalistic models which rely solely on one individual’s opinion about an issue, informative models provide people with facts and evidence related to whatever problem is at hand before allowing them to determine how best to proceed forward with a plan of action or solution (Chen & Ngai 2005). This allows individuals more agency in terms of deciding how they want things done instead of having someone else impose their own views onto them without considering every angle first.

However while informative models offer individuals more autonomy over their lives, it also presents potential problems concerning access and availability of information depending on context – such as whether individuals have access physical/digital forms resources required for obtaining necessary data – as well as potential biases surrounding interpretation due lack subjectivity/objectivity related matters (Sillence & Sillence 2017). Additionally these type approaches can also require large amounts time effort order obtain sufficient relevant quantitative/qualitative material prior forming conclusion – meaning many situations which require immediate response may lack appropriate space utilize system effectively (Catty et al 2018).

Shared Decision Making: Pros and Cons

The shared decision making model places emphasis on incorporating different perspectives into conversations around problem solving in order understand various sides argument prior creating consensus (Fagermoen et al 2017). By actively engaging members community discussion process allows multiple stakeholders voice opinions regarding specific course action rather than single authoritative figure dictating terms all others follow (Brandao et al 2019) . Such openness helps ensure both parties fairness throughout dialogue encourages democratic values among citizens thus helping foster greater collaboration unity efforts solve issues confronting group whole .

Despite advantages offered through shared structures however , inherent risks exist implementation strategies complicate intentions behind them . For example , collaborative processes tend place considerable amount pressure upon those participating potentially lowering quality overall results due increased timeframe needed reach agreement among participants compared traditional methods . Furthermore cultural norms particular setting may clash expectations thus disrupting dynamics leading conflict between parties instead harmony sought after during initial stages deliberation (Mendes 2019) . Finally even though prospect compromise always present outcome might still favor just single side argument leaving minority neglected unheard .
Conclusion
Overall out these three main types models used make decisions , shared approach appears strongest possibility resulting permanent change due combination factors balance between speed efficiency need maintain fairness freedom autonomy amongst participants alike along its ability promote democratic values societies encourage collaboration participation across spectrum members society work together better future generations come .. Therefore while original two options possess value respective contexts recommendation should prioritize utilization methods incorporated under umbrella shared framework moving forward deal complexity nature modern day problems pose increasingly interconnected world we inhabit today Citations format APA : Chen A Ngai EWT 2005 “Choice Architectures Changing Role Choice Architecture Design” Behavioral Science Technology 22 1 pp 27–41 Fagermoen MS Lygre Golme LK Dahlseng KI Bergink V 2017 “Sharing Perspectives Shared Decisions Mental Health Care” Qualitative Health Research 27 4 pp 534–546 Brandao CM Freire RR Oliveira RA Araujo TMC Silva AC Dantas ACS Souza DNSS 2019 “Evaluation Nursing Clinical Guidelines Based Shared Model Development Brazil” International Journal Nursing Knowledge 30 3 pp 189–196 Catty J Carver H Langham E Liu B Johnston R 2018 “What Effective Collaboration? Insights Mixed Methods Study Senior NHS Professionals UK Healthcare Setting” BMJ Open 8 6 p e019541 Mendes BRV Cunha M Costa MJN Gabardo AMD Ferreira LGB 2019 “Conflict Negotiation Planning Strategies Medication Administration Disputes Hospitalized Elderly Patients Through Multi-Professional Approach—An Exploratory Study Protocol” JMIR Research Protocols 8 11 p e12511 Sillence E Sillence AW 2017 “Implications Educational Policy Practices Contemporary Information Environment” Higher Learning Research Communications 7 2 pp 39–50