Groupthink

[macalimuu]

Groupthink*

 

Groupthink is the mode of thinking people engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant that it overrides any realistic appraisals of alternative courses of action. Thus, groupthink involves nondeliberate suppression of critical thinking as a result of internalization of the group's norms.

 

Symptoms of Groupthink Victims of groupthink

 

 

1. Share an illusion of invulnerability. That illusion provides a degree of reassurance about obvious dangers and leads them to become overly optimistic and willing to take extraordinary risks in the face of clear danger.

 

2. Believe unquestioningly in the inherent morality of their in-group. That belief inclines the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions.

 

3. Collectively construct rationalizations in order to discount warnings and other forms of negative feedback that might otherwise lead the group to reconsider its assumptions each time that it recommits themselves to past decisions.

 

4. Hold stereotyped views of “enemy groups.†Those “enemies†are thought to be so weak, unitelligent , or evil that any attempts at negotiating differences with them are unwarranted.

 

5. Exercise self-censorship by avoiding deviation from what appears to be group consensus. They keep silent about their misgivings and minimize to themselves the importance of their doubts.

 

6. Apply direct pressure to any individual who expresses doubts about any of the group's shared illusions. Likewise, they pressure anyone who questions the validity of the arguments favored by the majority.

 

7. Appoint themselves asmind guardsto protect the leader and fellow members from adverse information that might break the complacency they share about the effectiveness and morality of decisions.

 

8. Share an illusion of unanimity within the group concerning judgments expressed by members who speak in favor of the majority view.

 

Solutions to Groupthink

 

Recommendations for preventing groupthink include the following suggestions:

 

1. Assign the role of critical evaluator to each member. Encourage the group to give high priority to openly airing concerns, objections,and doubts.

 

2. Adopt an impartial stance instead of stating preferences and expectations at the beginning. This will encourage open inquiry and impartial probing of a wide range of alternatives.

 

3. Set up outside groups to work on the same issues or questions. Each should deliberate under a different leader. This can prevent the insulation of an in-group.

 

4. Require each member to discuss the group's deliberations with associates in his or her own unit of the organization and then report the reactions to the group.

 

5. Invite one or more outside experts to each meeting/discussion on a staggered basis and encourage the experts to challenge the views of the core members.

 

6. Assign at least one person the role ofdevil's advocate . Ensure that at least one person challenges the majority position.

 

7. Survey of all warning signals from rivals. Develop alternative scenariosthat are based on the rivals' intentions.

 

8. Divide the group into two or more subgroups to meet separately under different leaders.then,come back together to openly discuss and resolve differences.

 

9. After reaching a preliminary consensus about what seems to be the best policy or decision, the group should hold a second-chance meeting/discussion at which every member expresses as vividly as possible all residual doubts. Rethink the entire issue before making a definitive choice.

________________

* Source: Adapted from Timmons, K. (Writer & Director).

(1995). Groupthink . (Available from CRM Films,

2215 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008).