ABSTRACT
Many external observers, such as journalists, oppositional leaders and academicians, show a tendency to stress the role of individual and organizational errors and weaknesses in the making of a fiasco. They often take an implicit neo-rationalist stance as their critique often implies the assumption that the ways of the world can in principle be fully known and controlled by enlightened minds. Neo-rationalistic notions of policymaking have been dominant, implicitly or explicitly, in much of the policy analysis literature. The concept of "fate" as an important factor in public affairs has been germane to most of the scholars in the field. Sometimes policymakers have to accept that they are, temporarily or more fundamentally, losing rather than gaining control. This implies that there is no stable and universal dividing line between misfortune and mismanagement. In more individualistic cultures uncertainty is valued much more positively.
