Final answer:
Contradictory needs and desires of organizational stakeholders are not an inherent truth; mutual understanding could lead to harmonized decisions. Furthermore, it is true that majority rule may fail to yield a single preferred outcome with more than two choices due to complexities in collective decision-making.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that the needs and desires of organizational stakeholders are inherently contradictory is not always true. While it can sometimes be the case, it does not hold universally. Stakeholders may have different priorities and goals which can lead to conflicts. However, exploring the competing values underlying people's actions can foster mutual understanding and potentially lead to agreements over decisions. Moreover, the idea that any activity not contributing to true sustainability is contributing to failure suggests a perspective that prioritizes long-term success over short-term gains. This line of thinking implies that reconciliation of stakeholder interests may be possible through the lens of sustainability and shared long-term outcomes.
Regarding majority rule, the statement that it can fail to produce a single preferred outcome when there are more than two choices is true. This phenomenon is known in social choice theory as the Condorcet paradox, which occurs when individual preferences among three or more options can lead to a cycle with no clear winner using majority rule. It illustrates that collective decision-making can be complex and may not always result in a straightforward outcome.