Groupthink
Groupthink
Page 201
As you learned in chapter 8, engaging in productive conflict fosters healthy debate and leads to better decision making. Unity and cohesion are important for groups to operate effectively, but if these qualities are taken to an extreme—that is, if they become more powerful than members’ desire to evaluate alternative courses of action—the group can’t generate enough diverse ideas to make smart decisions (Miller & Morrison, 2009; Park, 2000).
Consider the tragic explosion of the U.S. space shuttle Challenger in 1986. Prior to launch, there had been some concern among many engineers that certain fittings (called O-rings) might fail, but the shuttle launched in spite of these concerns. Eventually, those fittings were indeed found to be related to the explosion, but a large part of the blame for the disaster was laid on communication failures within NASA. Engineers later testified that the climate at NASA made them reluctant to voice their concerns if they couldn’t back them up with a full set of data (McConnell, 1987). Indeed, the Rogers Commission (1986), which investigated the disaster, noted that if safety concerns had been more clearly articulated—and if NASA management had been more receptive to concerns raised by engineers from various departments—it is unlikely that Challenger would have launched that day.
The Challenger explosion is often pointed to as a classic example of groupthink—a situation in which group members strive to maintain cohesiveness and minimize conflict by refusing to critically examine ideas, analyze proposals, or test solutions (Janis, 1982). In a more receptive group climate, a productive conflict over the O-rings might have revealed the problems that the engineers sensed but couldn’t quite put their fingers on. The following are some symptoms of groupthink that you should be aware of in all your group memberships:
- Participants reach outward consensus and avoid expressing disagreement so as not to hurt each other’s feelings or appear disloyal.
- Members who do express disagreement with the majority are pressured to conform to the majority view.
- Tough questions are ignored or discouraged.
- Members spend more effort justifying their decisions than testing them.
One important way to prevent groupthink is to encourage dissent among members and manage it productively (Klocke, 2007). In fact, some of the same practices for handling interpersonal conflict discussed in chapter 8 can help you deal constructively with disagreements in a group. For example, frame conflicts as disagreements over issues or ideas, not as evidence of a weak character or some other personal shortcoming in particular members. To illustrate, when someone in the group expresses a dissenting viewpoint, don’t say, “It’s clear that you aren’t as dedicated to our cause as I had hoped.” Instead, say something like “It looks like we have some different ideas circulating about how to handle this new problem. Let’s list these ideas and talk about the possible benefits and risks of each of them.” A recent study by Aakhus and Rumsey (2010) supports this point by noting that productive conflict can generate more supportive communication for members of an online cancer support community than simply expecting members to keep dissenting opinions private.
