Final answer:
The statement is true; decision interrupts occur when an organization revisits previous decisions, as seen in a voting cycle. This reflects the cyclic process of decision-making, and the complexities in achieving conclusive outcomes due to the cyclical nature of preferences.
Step-by-step explanation:
A decision interrupt refers to a scenario where an organization or a group must revisit a previously made decision due to the emergence of new information, changes in the situation, or a failure of the initial plan. This is, in essence, the cyclical nature of decision-making where the process may not reach a stable conclusion because preferences can create a loop without definitive dominance of any single option. A common example of this is the voting cycle, where the preferences of a majority can be inconsistent. If the majority prefers policy A over policy B, policy B over policy C, and policy C over policy A, it creates a cyclical preference pattern that may never conclude satisfactorily.
This pattern is described by the term "Condorcet paradox" in social choice theory, which shows the complexity of collective decision-making where individual preferences do not align into a clear collective preference. The concept that an organization must cycle back through a previous decision and try something new is indeed correct, signifying that decision-making can be a cyclic process.
The true nature of a cyclic process, in terms of systems returning to their original state, helps to explain why making a final decision can be challenging when faced with circular preferences. In conclusion, decision interrupts are a real phenomenon in the context of organizational decision-making and reflect the complex dynamics involved in reaching a consensus or making choices when preferences are non-linear.