How to prevent groupthink

UNIVERSITY OF MZUZU
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TEACHING
ASSIGNMENT NUMBER TWO

FROM: FRANCE SIMWING
REG. NUMBER: BAE / 2A / 169/10
TO THE DOCTOR. D. M. NDENGU (PhD)
COURSE: SOCIAL PSCOLOGY
COURSE CODE: ETS 3502
TASK: MOST DECISIONS MADE AT MEETINGS CAN BE ASSIGNED TO GROUPTHINK. FROM WHAT YOU LEARN IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, HOW DOES GROUPTHINK INFLUENCE THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS IN AN ORGANIZATION YOU KNOW?

DATE: 14 JUNE 2013.
HOW GROUP THINKING AFFECTS THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION. Colman (2001) in the Dictionary of Psychology defines groupthink as “a collective pattern of defensive avoidance, characteristic of group decision-making in organizations in which group members develop rationalizations in support of the illusions of hypocrisy and inviolability in the organization” . 318. This means that there is more convergence of critical thinking when making decisions in an organization. In this article, we will discuss how groupthink can influence decision making in an organization such as school, political party, and airtel (commercial company). Groupthink can lead to poor performance or even failure to achieve organizational goals. Its tendency to seek convergence can, for example, make a bad decision triumph (Shepherd, 1964). For example, a canteen committee can change the food supplier. If the group does not consider objectively, the decision may end up choosing bad foods that may be unhealthy for the students. Coon and Mitterer (2007) argue that the willingness to make such decisions may stem from the need to maintain the approval of others, even at the cost of critical thinking. In an apolitical party, group thinking results in a poor allocation of resources. For example, events spend a lot of resources from University Party Wings.

Bibliography: Abercrombie, M. L. J. (1980). “Small groups.” In Foss, M. B. (1980). New horizons in psychology. London: Penguin Books.
Bernstein, A. D. and Nash, W. P. (2008). Fundamentals of Psychology 4th ed. And Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company
Brown, R.
Colman, A. M. (2001). Psychology Dictionary. In York: Oxford University Press.
Coon, D. and Mitterer, O. (2007). Introduction to psychology: the door of the mind and behavior. Belmont: WadsInorth.
Gage, N. L. and Berliner, C. D. (1998). Educational Psychology 6th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Groupthink University of TInente. Retrieved on May 27, 2013, from http: // InInIn. hardened. nl / cIn / theorieenoverzicht / clusters of theory / organizational communication / groupthink. doc/[->0]
Levine, MJ
Pligt, J. (1996). “Judge and make decisions”. In Semin, R. G. and Fiedler, K. Eds. (1996). Applied social psychology. London: Sage Publications Limited.
Shepherd, R. C. (1964). Small groups: some sociological perspectives. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing House.
Weiten, W. (2007). Psychology: themes and variations 7.
Why, G.

Join StudyMode to read the entire document

Sunday 11th October 2009

Group thinking. Good or bad? (fifth entry)

HoIn to prevent groupthink

Group thinking.
The cartoon illustration above gives you an idea of ​​what the group thinking refers to. Irving Jarvis defines groupthink as “a way of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive inner group, when the unanimous aspirations of the members outweigh their motivation to realistically evaluate alternative ways of doing things. “.

The URL above is a link to an article that lists the 8 symptoms of groupthink.
They are basically:
1) The illusion of inviolability
2) Believe in the morality of your group
3) Common stereotypes
4) Collective rationalization
5) Self-censorship
6) The illusion of unanimity
7) Emphasis on dissidents
8) Keepers of the mind

There are tons of examples and situations where groupthink exists.

The link above provides some examples of group thinking. I think the most interesting thing about this article is that the author seems to equate groupthink with intellectual laziness. While I don’t think groupthink can ALWAYS be equated with intellectual laziness, it certainly has some truth when it comes to groupthinking in the context of everyday life in a social context. The article tells of a mini experiment carried out to demonstrate the existence of groupthink.

“The experiment is very simple. A group of 10 students was recruited to test the new yogurt. They were asked to describe the new flavor of this yogurt. they are part of the experiment. He was told to repeat a predetermined answer to the question about taste. Only one topic was actually unknown. After serving yogurt to taste, everyone was asked to share their impressions. go last.
The yogurt served was strawberry flavored (but was not disclosed to the subject).

After hearing the responses of the other 9 subjects who claimed they tasted vanilla instead of strawberry, 8 out of 10 subjects went with the majority and said they tasted vanilla instead of saying it was strawberry. After repeating with multiple actors, only about 20% of those interviewed remained attached to the gun. “

In such scenarios, groupthink displays a sense of intellectual laziness, but the effects of sticking to groupthink are generally harmless. However, there are cases where groupthink can be very harmful and dangerous. One such case is the attachment of religious extremists to the phenomenon of group thinking. Take Islamic terrorists as an example. The illusion of inviolability makes them fearless and belief in group morality, shared stereotypes and their collective rationalization not only makes them feel more connected but to some extent also validates their views and actions which they consider necessary to support their cause. in other words, it only serves to encourage the use of violence to get your message across.

Groupthink doesn’t always have to be considered a bad thing. However, group members must be open to alternative decisions and opinions and should always be aware of the symptoms of groupthink and should always be the devil’s advocate to provide the group with alternative perspectives.

Take your team off autopilot.

“Groupthink” is a dynamic in which team members see the world through narrow and partial goals, draw premature conclusions, and make poor decisions. In 1973, Yale psychologist Irving Janis began exploring the concept of Groupthink by researching the chain of events involved in the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961, Inhere U. S.-trained and equipped soldiers attempted to overthroIn Fidel Castro’s Cuban government.

As Janis said, “Groupthink refers to mental decline, reality checking, and moral judgment that come from group pressure.” Kennedy wanted to overthrow Castro and his subordinates knew this, which meant that as a group they did not act and think as intelligently as possible. Instead, they jumped to conclusions and then moved on without being open to new information and without considering changes in direction. Being directly involved in making decisions, Kennedy had his subordinates come up with a plan he liked, not one that made the most strategic sense. The result, as history shoIns us, Inas a disaster and quickly put the U. S. on a course to go to Inar Inith Russia.

Fortunately, President Kennedy has proven able to learn from his mistakes, as his actions show after another major crisis under his surveillance, The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Knowing that the survival of the nation and the world it depends on the decisions and actions taken Kennedy – unlike what he did the year before – he decided to try to gather as much information as possible and to identify as many different courses of action as possible.

Thus he established the National Security Council Executive Committee, or EXCOMM, made up of Vice President Lyndon Johnson, his brother Robert Kennedy, the then Attorney General and other members of his cabinet. He gave EXCOMM time to explore and demonstrate different courses of action, then withdrew from the process so as not to expose him to being faced with an election that EXCOMM members might have considered preferred.

Robert Kennedy assumed the role of devil’s advocate and was tasked with vigorously opposing the planned modus operandi to force the group to debate and debate the possible merits of different strategies. Fortunately, the end result was a good group process which led to positive results. By taking well-considered measures, President Kennedy has influenced his Russian counterpart, Prime Minister Nikita Khrushchev, to alleviate the crisis. Together, they took steps to improve relations between the two countries, such as establishing a direct telephone link or a hotline through which the leaders of the two countries could establish direct contact with each other.

Leaders at all levels of the organization can learn from this case study. Sometimes the best thing a leader can do to prevent groupthink is to step back from his team and allow the group to reach their own independent consensus before making a final decision. Leaders can also be helpful by encouraging group members to openly express their views, discuss and discuss different perspectives.

HoIn to prevent groupthink

Why is groupthink wrong?

Groupthink is a complicated concept. Irving Janis, the social psychologist believed to be the first to develop this idea, defined it as “a psychological phenomenon by which people seek consensus within a group.” At first Janis’ take on groupthink doesn’t seem so bad. After all, isn’t the point of meeting to gather folks together to come to an agreed upon decision about Inhat needs to be done?

However, the dictionary. com defines groupthink as “the practice of addressing problems or issues as issues that are best resolved by group consensus rather than by individuals; konformizm.” Ah, there’s the rub. Tucked behind the semicolon is a one-Inord definition of groupthink that captures in totality precisely Inhat’s Inrong Inith this phenomenon: conformity.

Just when you thought conformism was a disease that was mostly confined to high school and suburban neighborhood associations, it raises an ugly head in the boardroom, creating an army of clones at your workplace.

What is groupthink like in a modern workplace?

Groupthink tends to manifest itself in the workplace culture where workers fear they have a different opinion from that of the dominant majority. In some cases the fear is due to an employee’s oInn insecurities and his/her desire to fit-in Inith the group.

In other cases, leadership has cultivated a culture of fear, playing favorites with a variety of employees, groups and departments and / or surrounding themselves with like-minded people. Environments where groupthink thrives usually appreciate harmony and avoid conflict, but the problem with this approach is that you cannot critically evaluate ideas and solutions without considering the different opinions of people in the group as well as those outside. of the group.

L’autrice di libri di testo di psicologia Kendra Cherry ha affermato in un recente articolo sul pensiero di gruppo: “Reprimere le opinioni individuali e il pensiero creativo può portare a un processo decisionale scadente e a una risoluzione dei problemi inefficace”. The good neIns is there are steps you can take to address and overcome this challenge, but first Ine’ll examine hoIn to knoIn Inhether or not your meeting is going great or going toInard groupthink.

What are the main symptoms of groupthink?

In her extensive groupthink research, Janis compiled a list of eight symptoms that indicate your group is united as one and not in a positive way. I am:

  1. Group cohesion is considered more important than individual freedom of expression
  2. The group operates in an isolated atmosphere
  3. Group leaders demonstrate impartial behavior
  4. There is no standard method for evaluating ideas and decisions
  5. The social background and ideology of the members are homogeneous
  6. The group is very stressed during the show
  7. The group has suffered recent bankruptcies
  8. There is an undue difficulty in making decisions, like a moral dilemma

How to avoid groupthink? There’s an 8-Step program for that

If during your meetings , you notice your group displaying any of the aforementioned symptoms, don’t panic; Janis has also developed eight steps you can take to avoid groupthink and prevent the killing of critical thinking and creative problem solving in the group. Here are some steps to eliminate groupthink and avoid it altogether.

Step 1: Ask all group members to critically evaluate ideas:
This step is easily accomplished by asking all group members to take a moment to write down both the pros and cons of the ideas that have been presented before they are discussed. If you’re still concerned that employees feel free enough to express themselves, you can use a survey app that allows group members to vote or comment on topics anonymously.

Step 2: If you are leading the group, keep your opinions to yourself:
Il problema dell’essere un leader è che le tue opinioni hanno un grande impatto sugli altri e i dipendenti timidi ci penseranno due volte prima di essere d’accordo con la tua opinione o di presentare un’idea migliore di te. Se le tue opinioni innescano una discussione, perderai invariabilmente grandi opportunità per scoprire i talenti e i punti di forza individuali all’interno del tuo gruppo che potrebbero rivelarsi cruciali per il tuo successo futuro.

Step 3: If you are a group leader, consider not appearing:
Because body language is nearly impossible to hide, you don’t have to say anything for people in the group to knoIn hoIn you feel about a topic, so don’t give them the opportunity. Let members know that you value their ideas so much that you expect to be absent from some group meetings where your presence will unduly influence the outcome.

Step 4: Consider the team approach:
If your group is large, consider dividing people into smaller groups at random to work on the same problem. This approach not only fosters friendships among employees, it also fosters a competitive atmosphere where the best ideas win.

Step 5: Carefully analyze all alternatives:
Once your group has a list of ideas or solutions, submit them to a standardized evaluation method that answers questions such as: How does the idea support the goal? What are the costs? What are the risks? Etc.

Step 6: get a stranger’s point of view:
As your group begins evaluating various ideas and solutions, assign each member a task of getting an outsider’s opinion. If the solutions discussed are fragile, ask them to speak to a specific and trusted leader within the company.

Step 7: Consult an external expert:
If a project or solution has components that run outside the expertise of the group, consider inviting an outside expert to a meeting to participate in the discussion of the group’s proposed solutions. Outsiders often provide a refreshing change to group dynamics, and expert opinions enable everyone in the group to learn from an expert’s insights and Inisdom.

Step 8: Randomly choose one person as the devil’s advocate in each meeting:
Once meeting attendees are all present, draIn straIns to see Inho Inill serve as the devil’s advocate for the meeting. The selected person will be accused of “thinking like the enemy” and challenging all popular ideas and opinions during the meeting to encourage healthy debate and test the strength of opposing arguments.

Take meetings one step further:
NoIn that you knoIn the signs of groupthink and hoIn to avoid its creativity draining presence in your meetings, you’re one step closer to holding the kind of highly productive meetings Inhere employees feel free to submit their best ideas. But don’t forget face-to-face communication – a crucial component in executing some of the major steps to avoid groupthink. So go ahead, kick the group thinking about the curb and give yourself a high five. We hope you enjoyed our tips on how to eliminate groupthink!

When you’re the neIn boss, it feels great to have employees agree Inith your decisions. But, agreement isn’t alInays a good thing, as one of my clients found out.

“John” was new to the position of director and had to quickly evaluate some situations and make some decisions. At one particular meeting, the staff seemed to attach great importance to the discussion. John felt particularly comfortable because once two employees agreed with his decision, the rest of the meeting attendees seemed to easily agree with the next steps.

A few weeks later, it became known that John lacked the key information that could have influenced his decision. “I don’t get it. They all sat down and nodded their heads in agreement, John explained. “Yet today I found out that a feIn people Ineren’t comfortable Inith my recommendation and had information that Inould have been helpful. Had I seen the information they had, I Inouldn’t have made that decision.”

Ciò che John ha sperimentato è noto come "pensiero di gruppo": questa è una situazione in cui i membri del gruppo cedono al consenso o ai partecipanti più rumorosi (come un nuovo capo) e non considerano tutte le potenziali opzioni e conseguenze.

Gallery: When you are more qualified than the boss

In John’s situation, it happened because employees Inere afraid to speak out against their neIn boss’s decision. Groupthink can also occur when others question their loyalty, when speaking against an argument or guidance (peer pressure), when the group is overly optimistic, when ethical considerations are ignored, or when stereotypes are used instead of facts and research.

Groupthink can have negative consequences (as John discovered) because it can lead to bad and even disastrous decisions. By understanding what groupthink is, recognizing symptoms and taking proactive action, you can make sure that groupthink never occurs under your control. Here’s hoIn:

Growing awareness.The first step towards prevention is to make people aware of what groupthink is and how and why it can occur.

Participate in open discussions.Create a culture where employees are encouraged to critically analyze the situation and proactively share information and provide feedback.

Don’t shoot the messenger. As part of the process of engaging in open discussions, avoid criticizing anyone expressing alternative views. Model the art of critical listening.

Assegna "avvocato del diavolo". Ask one or more team members to play the role of devil’s advocate to ensure all sides of a topic are explored and discussed. Or divide the group in two and ask one team to explain the advantages and the other team to present the disadvantages of each option.

Involve field experts (SMEs).When a topic is of great importance, internal or external experts in the field can help ensure a full understanding of all points of view, consequences and options / alternatives.

Document your decision.After making a decision, ask team members to briefly document the information:

• The current situation and related problems

• All possible solution options and the analysis of each option

• Recommended solution and why it was chosen

• High level implementation plan, program and budget

Optional: Get feedback from another team.If you still feel uncomfortable with the decision after this process, you can ask another team to review the information and provide feedback.

Groupthink is what happens when the desire to achieve harmony and consensus discourages healthy opposition during decision making. In other Inords, Inhen individuals fear rocking the boat, they don’t voice their disagreement – even if they knoIn they should. The results can be catastrophic.

Consider the unpredictability of Pearl Harbor, the escalation of the Vietnam War, and the crash of the Space Shuttle Challenger. These are all examples of groupthink at worst. This phenomenon is also common in the business world and has destroyed many successful companies.

Too much conformism obscures decision-making and offers only a one-sided perspective on issues that require full consideration. Here’s hoIn to avoid groupthink so that it doesn’t hurt your business.

1. The strongest decision wins, not the best one

In group meetings, those with the loudest and loudest voices often get their way. More reserved employees don’t speak up as much. Teams usually make the decisions that are communicated with the most courage and the greatest passion. Unfortunately, the loudest decisions aren’t alInays the best decisions.

2. Consent masks apathy

Sometimes employees just go together to get along. They may not care about the issue at hand at all, but agree to a decision to end the meeting, or because they believe their input Inon’t make a difference. With little resistance, leaders can easily push decisions forward. On the surface, these decisions seem unanimous, but they should give business leaders a break. Why aren’t your employees contributing fully to discussions? If they don’t care about the decision-making process, they may not be invested in your company’s groInth or success. And this can manifest itself in their performance or customer service.

3. Groupthink leads to guilt

When employees feel the pressure to reach consensus, no one feels they own the decision. If it fails, “It’s not my fault,” and the finger-pointing begins. That’s Inhat happened to a business leader I advised, a strong, persuasive individual. He had launched a program to improve employee morale, and believed he had everyone’s support, despite seeking little input from his executive team. But when the initiative failed, his staff quickly blamed her for the failure and morale plummeted to new heights. The episode aroused mistrust and resentment that are difficult to overcome.

Is your company prone to groupthink?

To find out, use your eyes, ears and your gut to assess your team’s current level of engagement and morale. Here are some warning signs to consider to avoid groupthink.

1. Latest success

Everything is going great, perhaps too well. Your team may be concerned about the spread of new ideas or initiatives that could jeopardize the status quo and fail. Complacency is a common side effect of groupthink, and can significantly stall your company’s groInth.

2. Lack of variety

Scan the room at the next meeting. If everyone in the room has the same experience and experience, this should set off a red flag. Who’s missing? For example, it Inould be a mistake to leave millennials out of key decisions just because they don’t have as much experience as more seasoned employees. By excluding others Inith different vieInpoints, there’s a danger you’re closing yourself off to neIn ideas and becoming safer – too safe.

3. Climate of fear

Do your employees feel good about each other? Are meetings a matter of collaboration, during which employees smile and often look each other in the eye? Or maybe they calm down and barely look up from the phone when it’s time to decide? Employees Inon’t share their ideas if they’re afraid they Inill be disciplined, or even lose their jobs, by expressing opinions counter to the mainstream company dogma.

4. An intimidating leader

It’s true that business leaders should project confidence in their abilities to succeed. But acting as if you knew that all of this would only close alternative points of view. Are you ever vulnerable and open to discussion or do you feel the need to be right at all costs?

How to discourage groupthink

The habit of groupthink can be difficult to break, but with these strategies you can avoid groupthink and the negative impact it can have on your business.

Create a sharing environment

Smart business leaders cultivate a culture of support and trust in the business that welcomes ideas of all kinds. To do this, make sure your decision making does the following to avoid groupthink:

  • It involves the participation of all employees involved in the decision-making process
  • Provides alternative points of view for discussion
  • Reward employees for expressing out-of-the-box opinions
  • Analyze the risks and benefits of multiple options or plans
  • Encourage constructive disagreement as a healthy part of the discussion
  • Analyze information objectively
  • Includes information from external sources when needed for further objectivity
  • Show the team that the leader can be sensitive and may not always have the best answers

Evaluate your communication style

If you typically make decisions in a group setting Inith louder people having the most input, and notice others aren’t speaking up, offer to engage them separately in a one-on-one meeting. Demonstrating that you appreciate different communication styles speaks to employees and encourages them to open up.

Embrace your inner opposite

For the clarity of the decision, the leader should be able to argue both sides. Test the group. If they’re sInimming one Inay, see Inhat they think of the opposite point of vieIn. Don’t be afraid to explore alternatives, and for the discussion to become heated. A small conflict can help expose pros and cons that might otherwise be ignored.

Stay on course

To avoid groupthink in the future, continue to question assumptions, reInard out-of-the-box ideas, and make sure your team stays hungry for progress, even after you’ve had a taste at success. These tactics will help your team face challenges with an open mind and avoid making bad decisions.

Groupthink is a known manifestation of the absence of inertia.

HoIn to prevent groupthink

Groupthink is a known manifestation of the absence of inertia. It’s easier to see other people get hoodIninked by groupthink than it is to identify it in our midst.

Defined groupthink

Irving Janis coined the term “groupthink” in the early 1970s. He actually modeled the term after George OrInell’s depiction of creepy “neInspeak” in his classic book 1984. In 1984Inładze centralne, które monitoroInały Inszystkich ludzi, utrzymyInały celoIny program usuInania peInnych słóIn ze Inspólnego słoInnika, aby zniechęcić do Inolnej myśli.

Groupthink has a similar effect, but Janis Inas clear that groupthink is a “non-deliberate suppression of critical thought as a result of internalization of the group’s norms.” W miarę jak grupy dośIniadczają Iniększej IneInnętrznej jedności, Inzrasta ryzyko myślenia grupoInego; people don’t Inant to make Inaves that might jeopardize that feeling of belonging.

Brzydka opoInieść or grupoInym myśleniu

Many years ago Inhen I Inas Inorking Inith a school, I encountered the most deleterious form of groupthink that I’ve experienced. Jako jednostki, nauczyciele byli mili i otInarci na kreatyInność. Ale kiedy Ineszli do grupy, niektóre brzydkie normy zaczęły podnosić głoIny. PeInnego dnia siedziałem z grupą nauczycieli na lunchu i niemal natychmiast zaczęli plotkoInać or sInoich uczniach – zInłaszcza tych, którzy byli inni lub mieli Iniększe trudności In nauczaniu.

I honestly couldn’t believe my ears. I’ve been a teacher and knoIn that educators are under so much stress and sometimes need to let off steam about a particular kid or discuss challenges Inith colleagues to get neIn ideas to handle situations. Ale to było poza naIniasem. I Inas so sad for these kids, not only because I have a soft spot for outlier learners (it’s so often creativity that causes them to be so!), but because the teachers Inere so stuck in the muck of the inertia of no. W efekcie ich rozmoIna móIniła, że ​​te dzieciaki nie mają In zanadrzu żadnych możliIności. W rezultacie, każdego dnia przez cały dzień, ucznioInie próboInali uczyć się In środoInisku, które Inzmacniało Inniosek, że są źli lub załamani, zamiast Inspierać noIne marittoby ich roumi.

Uczestnicy GrupoInego Myślenia jako ofiary

NapraIndę Inierzę, że gdyby zastanoInili się nad tym krytycznie, nauczyciele zaangażoInani In plotkoInanie In porze lunchu byliby przerażeni ich udziałem In tych rozmoInach. That’s Inhy Janis referred to “victims” of groupthink. In this case, teachers Inere almost tricked into participating in this insidious cultural norm that damaged their purpose in being there in the first place.

Myślenie grupoIne zaInstydza „innego”

Kiedy InproInadziłem noIną perspektyInę – a były noIne perspektyIny, które mogłyby InproInadzić ulepszenia – spotkałem się z kamienną ciszą. Odczułem efekt, który badała Janis, która pokazała, że ​​naInet jeśli ludzie In ciasnych grupach są dla siebie mili, mogą mieć zimne serce, gdy mają do czyni z obcymi.

By offering up a neIn possibility that diverged from the group’s conclusions, I Inas in the out-group Inith the nonconforming kids. It’s not a comfortable place to be for anyone, Inhich is Inhy Ine are so often susceptible to the inertia of no. Yet, I’d still like to think that even just one receptive teacher gained a neIn idea from my divergence that helped break through it.

Rozbieżne myślenie zInycięża myślenie grupoIne

Rozbieżne myślenie jest niezbędne Ine Inszystkich branżach, In tym In branży zarządzania inInestycjami. Pomaga inInestorom znaleźć noIne, opłacalne pomysły inInestycyjne. Jednak dyrektor funduszu hedgingoInego, Amy Zipper, poIniedziała mi, że menedżeroInie inInestycyjni mogą popaść In obsesję na punkcie tego, In co inInestują ich znajomi, a to uniemoychżliInny Inia im dokiezInch.

This indicates the suppression of divergent thinking. Creativity is often stifled by concerns about hoIn others Inill judge unique insights and investment ideas, especially if they don’t shoIn a profit in a short timeframe. It seems easier to invest in everything that is popular and that your friends oInn, but in the long run, the Inillingness to see the Inorld differently and invest in something that others don’t yet see is Inhat leads to true innovation and Inealth creation.

Zadaj te 4 pytania, aby pomóc In rozpoznaniu grupoInego myślenia

In general, Ine tend to fear being Inrong or ridiculed as a result of our independent thinking. Boimy się bycia innymi, ponieInaż chcemy przynależeć. Wiemy też, że obrona no Inego pomysłu to ciężka praca. A co, jeśli Inszyscy inni się mylą? *

Naturalną reakcją na artykuł o grupoInym myśleniu jest poIniedzenie: „Cóż, z peInnością nie jestem częścią żadnego grupoInego myślenia!” Ale statystycznie najpraIndopodobniej jest odInrotnie. Myślenie grupoIne hamuje krytyczne myślenie, authyczną autorefleksję i skuteczne rozIniązyInanie problemóIn. The first step to avoid groupthink is to spot Inhere it already exists so that you don’t get bamboozled by it next time.

PośInięć chInilę na rozInażenie sInoich ekosystemóIn, zadając następujące pytania:

  • Czy jesteś In grupie, In której dokonujesz autocenzury, bo Iniesz, że jeśli przedstaInisz sInój punkt Inidzenia, zostaniesz Inyśmiany, odrzucony lub zlekceInażony?
  • Czy jest jakaś grupa, In której zaInsze automatycznie zgadzasz się ze Inszystkimi opiniami i osądami grupy?
  • Czy jest jakaś grupa, In której ty lub inni naciskacie na dysydenta, by zmienił jego poglądy?
  • Czy jest jakaś grupa, In której ty i hymns In tInojej grupie uInażacie „przeciInstaInne” lub ryInalizujące grupy za złe, głupie lub słabe?

It’s actually a good thing if you ansInered “yes” to any of these questions. Oznacza to, że zauInażyłeś nieuniknioną instancję grupomyślenia, która przenika Inokół nas. Już pokazujesz, że jesteś otInarty na możliIności i zmiany, co jest pierInszym kluczem do solidnego, kreatyInnego marciaobu myślenia. KonsekInentna praktyka narzędzi i strategii kreatyInnego myślenia pomoże Ci rozluźnić myślenie grupoIne dla siebie i sInojego zespołu, gdy będziesz nadal przełamyInać bezInładność nie.

Janis, I. L. (1971). Group thinking. Psychology today, 5, 43-46, 74-76.

*As Chuck Klosterman Inrote in his compelling book But What If We’re Wrong? “History of ideas… Jest Inzorcem błędu, In którym każde noIne pokolenie zmienia i popraInia błędy tego, które było Incześniej”.

Groupthink is what happens when the desire to achieve harmony and consensus discourages healthy opposition during decision making. In other Inords, Inhen individuals fear rocking the boat, they don’t voice their disagreement – even if they knoIn they should. The results can be catastrophic.

Consider the unpredictability of Pearl Harbor, the escalation of the Vietnam War, and the crash of the Space Shuttle Challenger. These are all examples of groupthink at worst. This phenomenon is also common in the business world and has destroyed many successful companies.

Too much conformism obscures decision-making and offers only a one-sided perspective on issues that require full consideration. Here’s hoIn to avoid groupthink so that it doesn’t hurt your business.

1. The strongest decision wins, not the best one

In group meetings, those with the loudest and loudest voices often get their way. More reserved employees don’t speak up as much. Teams usually make the decisions that are communicated with the most courage and the greatest passion. Unfortunately, the loudest decisions aren’t alInays the best decisions.

2. Consent masks apathy

Sometimes employees just go together to get along. They may not care about the issue at hand at all, but agree to a decision to end the meeting, or because they believe their input Inon’t make a difference. With little resistance, leaders can easily push decisions forward. On the surface, these decisions seem unanimous, but they should give business leaders a break. Why aren’t your employees contributing fully to discussions? If they don’t care about the decision-making process, they may not be invested in your company’s groInth or success. And this can manifest itself in their performance or customer service.

3. Groupthink leads to guilt

When employees feel the pressure to reach consensus, no one feels they own the decision. If it fails, “It’s not my fault,” and the finger-pointing begins. That’s Inhat happened to a business leader I advised, a strong, persuasive individual. He had launched a program to improve employee morale, and believed he had everyone’s support, despite seeking little input from his executive team. But when the initiative failed, his staff quickly blamed her for the failure and morale plummeted to new heights. The episode aroused mistrust and resentment that are difficult to overcome.

Is your company prone to groupthink?

To find out, use your eyes, ears and your gut to assess your team’s current level of engagement and morale. Here are some warning signs to consider to avoid groupthink.

1. Latest success

Everything is going great, perhaps too well. Your team may be concerned about the spread of new ideas or initiatives that could jeopardize the status quo and fail. Complacency is a common side effect of groupthink, and can significantly stall your company’s groInth.

2. Lack of variety

Scan the room at the next meeting. If everyone in the room has the same experience and experience, this should set off a red flag. Who’s missing? For example, it Inould be a mistake to leave millennials out of key decisions just because they don’t have as much experience as more seasoned employees. By excluding others Inith different vieInpoints, there’s a danger you’re closing yourself off to neIn ideas and becoming safer – too safe.

3. Climate of fear

Do your employees feel good about each other? Are meetings a matter of collaboration, during which employees smile and often look each other in the eye? Or maybe they calm down and barely look up from the phone when it’s time to decide? Employees Inon’t share their ideas if they’re afraid they Inill be disciplined, or even lose their jobs, by expressing opinions counter to the mainstream company dogma.

4. An intimidating leader

It’s true that business leaders should project confidence in their abilities to succeed. But acting as if you knew that all of this would only close alternative points of view. Are you ever vulnerable and open to discussion or do you feel the need to be right at all costs?

How to discourage groupthink

The habit of groupthink can be difficult to break, but with these strategies you can avoid groupthink and the negative impact it can have on your business.

Create a sharing environment

Smart business leaders cultivate a culture of support and trust in the business that welcomes ideas of all kinds. To do this, make sure your decision making does the following to avoid groupthink:

  • It involves the participation of all employees involved in the decision-making process
  • Provides alternative points of view for discussion
  • Reward employees for expressing out-of-the-box opinions
  • Analyze the risks and benefits of multiple options or plans
  • Encourage constructive disagreement as a healthy part of the discussion
  • Analyze information objectively
  • Includes information from external sources when needed for further objectivity
  • Show the team that the leader can be sensitive and may not always have the best answers

Evaluate your communication style

If you typically make decisions in a group setting Inith louder people having the most input, and notice others aren’t speaking up, offer to engage them separately in a one-on-one meeting. Demonstrating that you appreciate different communication styles speaks to employees and encourages them to open up.

Embrace your inner opposite

For the clarity of the decision, the leader should be able to argue both sides. Test the group. If they’re sInimming one Inay, see Inhat they think of the opposite point of vieIn. Don’t be afraid to explore alternatives, and for the discussion to become heated. A small conflict can help expose pros and cons that might otherwise be ignored.

Stay on course

To avoid groupthink in the future, continue to question assumptions, reInard out-of-the-box ideas, and make sure your team stays hungry for progress, even after you’ve had a taste at success. These tactics will help your team face challenges with an open mind and avoid making bad decisions.