Groupthink Research Paper
Groupthink is a concept that was identified by Irving Janis that refers to faulty decision-making in a group. Groups experiencing groupthink do not consider all alternatives and they desire unanimity at the expense of quality decisions. Groupthink is a mode of thinking people engage in when cohesiveness is high. Groupthink leads to poor decision making and results in a lack of creativity. Groupthink has been studied widely; many people are unaware of its dynamics and the consequences that they might bring. Irving L. Janis (1918 - 1990) was a research psychologist at Yale University and a professor at the University of California. He retired in 1986 (Wikipedia, 2008). In 1981 he was awarded Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award of the
…show more content…
American Psychological Association. His works included "Crucial Decisions: Leadership in Policy Making and Crisis Management", "Groupthink", and with Leon Mann, "Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice and Commitment" (The New York Times, 1990).
Critique
Goal oriented groups consist of people with matching skills who are committed to a common purpose, have specific performance goals, share a common working approach, and hold mutual accountability. These types of groups are used when there are complex problems to be solved, important situations to work through, or uncertain conditions. Groups function best when there are no immediate time pressures. Groups are successful because the group members bring different ideas, the collective knowledge of everyone is significant, and groups tend to be focused. There are certain situations which call for the use of groups. Groups can be beneficial when communication between departments is necessary in a business setting or when the consent of many people is required. Individuals can also benefit from group participation. Many people who work in groups are able to learn new skills, take risks, get feedback, and discover personal strengths and weaknesses. Fullan explains groupthink as ‘the uncritical acceptance and/or suppression of dissent in going along with group decisions’ (Lenore Armour, p.94). The symptoms of Groupthink are clear. The "illusion of invulnerability" happens when a group thinks that they cannot go wrong. Confidence among the members of the group is remarkably high and is reflected in the decisions that they make. A "belief in inherent morality of the group" occurs when the group thinks tremendously of their morality. The group believes that it is doing the right thing in all circumstances. "Collective rationalization" is another symptom of Groupthink. Groups who experience this believe that nothing can be wrong with their plan even if there is significant evidence to prove otherwise. A lack of creativity and a disregard for others' options is a characteristic of groups with "out-group stereotypes." Groups often pay little attention to what outsiders have to say, and this can be detrimental. "Self-censorship" occurs when group members don't share their ideas with the rest of the group because of fear of being rejected. The "illusion of unanimity" explains that silence can often be interpreted as acceptance.
Pressures from superiors and peers can be reinforced by the tendency of members of a cohesive group to avoid introducing stress into their unanimity by suppressing dissent and characterizing potential critics as "just not getting it" (Robert, p.17).
Groupthink will effect on a individual if that person has raised any obligation against the groups policies. All of these are symptoms of Groupthink. If one or more of these are commonplace in a particular group, change must occur. The more amiability and esprit de corps among the members of a policy-making in-group, the greater is the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanizing actions directed against out-groups (Janis). That is, highly cohesive decision making groups are likely to fall victim of the groupthink syndrome, and this likely will lead to both a incorrect decision process and a incorrect decision. A flawed decision is, logically, more likely to result in a failure or less than optimally successful …show more content…
result. According to the author there are ways where groupthink can be prevented. One way of preventing Groupthink is to make each member of the group a critical evaluator. Members of the group will attempt to find problems in group solutions by evaluating them individually. The leader must accept criticism if this is to work. But making each member of the group analyze solutions individually is problematic. Group members can spend too much time debating when there is an important deadline. Feelings can be hurt when the ideas of individual group members are criticized. Some group members may not have the skills to think critically about the presented solutions.
Leaders who assign tasks to a group must be impartial and must not lead the group to believe that a certain outcome is expected. Group members will not attempt to conform with beliefs of the leadership if they are unsure of what the leader wants. Problems arise because the leader often feels that there is no centralized control within the group.
Many different groups can work on the same problem under separate leaders. Every group would come up with different ideas, and the pressure to conform is not as great. In some instances security can be a problem. Information is more likely to leak out if more people are aware of the information. Problems also arise when a group assumes that another group will examine the pieces to the solution that have been missed. It is much easier to allow someone else to complete the task. When one group is working on a particular problem this wouldn’t happen.
Groups should be divided into two or more subgroups. Each group should be led by a different chairperson. Both groups can eventually come together and discuss ideas. Groups that do this are less likely to be locked into one solution.
Outside experts can be brought in to observe the group functioning. The experts should have the ability to question the decisions of the group. The experts need to be very qualified and skilled in their ability to sort through and analyze solutions of the group. The experts must also be able to criticize the group in a fashion that will not turn the group away from the expert. Good communication skills are essential. It is important that experts become a part of the group before a general consensus is reached among all group members.
Every group should include a specific member who has the job of playing devil's advocate. This person should seriously question much of what the group members say. The devil's advocate must be willing to vocally share his ideas with the rest of the group. This strategy will force the group to take a second look at every decision that is made. The devil's advocate of the group must be taken seriously and be allowed to speak at will if this strategy is to be effective.
The best way to avoid groupthink is to have an understanding and awareness of it. Groups that constantly question decisions are likely to never encounter Groupthink. Groups are useful and necessary in many situations. They often solve problems that individuals cannot. Groupthink can limit the value of groups. Groupthink problems can be recognized by identifying a set of characteristics including an illusion of invulnerability, self censorship, and others. Author recommends many strategies for avoiding Groupthink. Groups can assign the role of critical evaluator to each member, divide into subgroups and invite experts to sit in on meetings, and so on. Groupthink is a problem that can have destructive consequences. If group members are aware of Groupthink and are constantly checking for it the damaging effects of this condition can be avoided.
Today’s Workplace As we all know the current situation of our country, that is the fuel prices going up and we are in the situation to face a recession.
As I think that the group of advisors who advised our president to go on a war with Iraq without knowing any consequences. Our group of advisors only thought of finding the biological weapons which was developed by Iraq and they thought that president of Iraq who was Saddam Hussein was a threat to the world. Due to this groupthink country has lost lot of loyal soldiers and killed innocent lives in Iraq. As far as my thought with little knowledge regarding this action the consequences we are facing today is because of the
groupthink. We also know there is a good part of groupthink too. As we see lot of companies like Google, Microsoft, Dell and others have reached this position due to their groupthink. These companies had a good way of treating groupthink and used it in a right way. As author Irving Jinas explains about the groupthink there is lot of setbacks and also if we adopt it properly then nothing is impossible to achieve. There is a old saying that “strength is in the unity”.
American Psychological Association. His works included "Crucial Decisions: Leadership in Policy Making and Crisis Management", "Groupthink", and with Leon Mann, "Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice and Commitment" (The New York Times, 1990).
Critique
Goal oriented groups consist of people with matching skills who are committed to a common purpose, have specific performance goals, share a common working approach, and hold mutual accountability. These types of groups are used when there are complex problems to be solved, important situations to work through, or uncertain conditions. Groups function best when there are no immediate time pressures. Groups are successful because the group members bring different ideas, the collective knowledge of everyone is significant, and groups tend to be focused. There are certain situations which call for the use of groups. Groups can be beneficial when communication between departments is necessary in a business setting or when the consent of many people is required. Individuals can also benefit from group participation. Many people who work in groups are able to learn new skills, take risks, get feedback, and discover personal strengths and weaknesses. Fullan explains groupthink as ‘the uncritical acceptance and/or suppression of dissent in going along with group decisions’ (Lenore Armour, p.94). The symptoms of Groupthink are clear. The "illusion of invulnerability" happens when a group thinks that they cannot go wrong. Confidence among the members of the group is remarkably high and is reflected in the decisions that they make. A "belief in inherent morality of the group" occurs when the group thinks tremendously of their morality. The group believes that it is doing the right thing in all circumstances. "Collective rationalization" is another symptom of Groupthink. Groups who experience this believe that nothing can be wrong with their plan even if there is significant evidence to prove otherwise. A lack of creativity and a disregard for others' options is a characteristic of groups with "out-group stereotypes." Groups often pay little attention to what outsiders have to say, and this can be detrimental. "Self-censorship" occurs when group members don't share their ideas with the rest of the group because of fear of being rejected. The "illusion of unanimity" explains that silence can often be interpreted as acceptance.
Pressures from superiors and peers can be reinforced by the tendency of members of a cohesive group to avoid introducing stress into their unanimity by suppressing dissent and characterizing potential critics as "just not getting it" (Robert, p.17).
Groupthink will effect on a individual if that person has raised any obligation against the groups policies. All of these are symptoms of Groupthink. If one or more of these are commonplace in a particular group, change must occur. The more amiability and esprit de corps among the members of a policy-making in-group, the greater is the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanizing actions directed against out-groups (Janis). That is, highly cohesive decision making groups are likely to fall victim of the groupthink syndrome, and this likely will lead to both a incorrect decision process and a incorrect decision. A flawed decision is, logically, more likely to result in a failure or less than optimally successful …show more content…
result. According to the author there are ways where groupthink can be prevented. One way of preventing Groupthink is to make each member of the group a critical evaluator. Members of the group will attempt to find problems in group solutions by evaluating them individually. The leader must accept criticism if this is to work. But making each member of the group analyze solutions individually is problematic. Group members can spend too much time debating when there is an important deadline. Feelings can be hurt when the ideas of individual group members are criticized. Some group members may not have the skills to think critically about the presented solutions.
Leaders who assign tasks to a group must be impartial and must not lead the group to believe that a certain outcome is expected. Group members will not attempt to conform with beliefs of the leadership if they are unsure of what the leader wants. Problems arise because the leader often feels that there is no centralized control within the group.
Many different groups can work on the same problem under separate leaders. Every group would come up with different ideas, and the pressure to conform is not as great. In some instances security can be a problem. Information is more likely to leak out if more people are aware of the information. Problems also arise when a group assumes that another group will examine the pieces to the solution that have been missed. It is much easier to allow someone else to complete the task. When one group is working on a particular problem this wouldn’t happen.
Groups should be divided into two or more subgroups. Each group should be led by a different chairperson. Both groups can eventually come together and discuss ideas. Groups that do this are less likely to be locked into one solution.
Outside experts can be brought in to observe the group functioning. The experts should have the ability to question the decisions of the group. The experts need to be very qualified and skilled in their ability to sort through and analyze solutions of the group. The experts must also be able to criticize the group in a fashion that will not turn the group away from the expert. Good communication skills are essential. It is important that experts become a part of the group before a general consensus is reached among all group members.
Every group should include a specific member who has the job of playing devil's advocate. This person should seriously question much of what the group members say. The devil's advocate must be willing to vocally share his ideas with the rest of the group. This strategy will force the group to take a second look at every decision that is made. The devil's advocate of the group must be taken seriously and be allowed to speak at will if this strategy is to be effective.
The best way to avoid groupthink is to have an understanding and awareness of it. Groups that constantly question decisions are likely to never encounter Groupthink. Groups are useful and necessary in many situations. They often solve problems that individuals cannot. Groupthink can limit the value of groups. Groupthink problems can be recognized by identifying a set of characteristics including an illusion of invulnerability, self censorship, and others. Author recommends many strategies for avoiding Groupthink. Groups can assign the role of critical evaluator to each member, divide into subgroups and invite experts to sit in on meetings, and so on. Groupthink is a problem that can have destructive consequences. If group members are aware of Groupthink and are constantly checking for it the damaging effects of this condition can be avoided.
Today’s Workplace As we all know the current situation of our country, that is the fuel prices going up and we are in the situation to face a recession.
As I think that the group of advisors who advised our president to go on a war with Iraq without knowing any consequences. Our group of advisors only thought of finding the biological weapons which was developed by Iraq and they thought that president of Iraq who was Saddam Hussein was a threat to the world. Due to this groupthink country has lost lot of loyal soldiers and killed innocent lives in Iraq. As far as my thought with little knowledge regarding this action the consequences we are facing today is because of the
groupthink. We also know there is a good part of groupthink too. As we see lot of companies like Google, Microsoft, Dell and others have reached this position due to their groupthink. These companies had a good way of treating groupthink and used it in a right way. As author Irving Jinas explains about the groupthink there is lot of setbacks and also if we adopt it properly then nothing is impossible to achieve. There is a old saying that “strength is in the unity”.