Combatting Group Think

While the idea of your team members at work all being in agreement on a particular course of action might not sound alarming in and of itself, if that consensus is the result of a phenomenon known as groupthink, it could be cause for concern. That's because with groupthink, decisions are often the result of a blinding focus on conformity rather than what might actually be best for business.

In the early 1950s, psychologist Irving Janis referred to groupthink as "rationalized conformity." Instead of listening to minority voices who may have held different opinions, groups of people during that time simply went along with an unspoken consensus put forth by one or two respected individuals.

In the workplace, similar instances occur when departments and employees are pressured by executives or team leads to go along with a specific plan in order to maintain a greater sense of harmony. With no one ever voicing dissenting opinions, however, the practice frequently results in an overall lack of critical thinking, as well as suppressed creativity and innovation.

Several historic examples of groupthink exist. The Challenger explosion in January 1986 occurred when NASA officials failed to listen to engineers who said the freezing temperatures would affect the hardware on the solid rocket boosters. Sadly, the engineers were correct in their assessment, but higher-ups at NASA felt as if the agency could do no wrong.

The 2007 housing bubble collapse occurred when lenders and investors thought banks were too big to fail. They approved mortgages at lower interest rates; when the rates rose and incomes didn't, millions of homes went into foreclosure, and the global economy collapsed. No one bothered to combat groupthink in the housing market until it was too late.

Organizations that exhibit groupthink take increasingly risky actions because they become emboldened by the people who agree with the opinions and strategies presented to the group. Part of this is because humans just want to get along, and they want to feel accepted among their peers. Unfortunately, this conformity makes it harder to combat groupthink because no one wants to argue, fight or be proven wrong.

Measured steps must be taken by organizations hoping to combat groupthink. An open environment that doesn't squelch dissenting opinions is one such step. Studies conducted by Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson show that firms that embrace differing opinions have better overall performance versus those that dampen minority views. Businesses must create a model that embraces people with new ideas so they feel safe to express themselves without fear of retribution or shunning. To this end, companies should hire people from different backgrounds.

Another strategy is actually embracing diversity directly. When you have people with similar educational backgrounds, ethnicities, demographics and career aspirations in the same room, these employees may come to the same conclusions about data, strategic planning and revenue forecasts. Promoting workplace diversity brings in people who could present different opinions and spot future problems. Employers with more diverse communities are generally more innovative and have better marketing strategies and customer service departments.

Firms should combat groupthink by encouraging individual ideas and welcoming differences of opinion. Companies should recognize that alternate ways of thinking aren't bad and that investigating every possible angle can prevent the kind of mishaps that can lead to man-made disasters.

Photo courtesy of Gry1 at Flickr.com