Groupthink

[Xipe Totec]

Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Cohesiveness, or the desire for cohesiveness, in a group may produce a tendency among its members to agree at all costs. This causes the group to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation.

Groupthink is a construct of social psychology, but has an extensive reach and influences literature in the fields of communication studies, political science, management, and organizational theory, as well as important aspects of deviant religious cult behaviour.


Groupthink requires individuals to avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions, and there is loss of individual creativity, uniqueness and independent thinking. The dysfunctional group dynamics of the "ingroup" produces an "illusion of invulnerability" (an inflated certainty that the right decision has been made). Thus the "ingroup" significantly overrates its own abilities in decision-making and significantly underrates the abilities of its opponents (the "outgroup" ). Furthermore, groupthink can produce dehumanizing actions against the "outgroup". Members of a group can often feel peer pressure to "go along with the crowd" in fear of rocking the boat or of what them speaking up will do to the overall to how their teammates perceive them. Group interactions tend to favor clear and harmonious agreements and it can be a cause for concern when little to no new innovations or arguments for better policies, outcomes and structures are called to question. (McLeod). Groupthink can often be referred to as a group of “yes men” because group activities and group projects in general make it extremely easy to pass on not offering constructive opinions.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink#:~:text=Groupthink%20is%20a%20psychological%20phenomenon,or%20dysfunctional%20decision%2Dmaking%20outcome.

I think we can come up with one or two examples.

[Redleg]

1. It's good stuff

Although not all of the proposed determinants have been supported by research, it is still a useful framework for analyzing group decision-making problems. I used to have my students read an article that applied Groupthink to the Space Shuttle Challenger incident.

Groupthink and Social Identity Theory are both useful to help understand the modern GOP elected officials.

[Xipe Totec]

2. I classify the Challenger accident also as underestimating risk through habituation

"We've had O-ring burn through before and it was fine..."

But yea, a lot of peer pressure on the engineers to "not disappoint".

As an aside, I worked on the Shuttle's on-board flight software system, from ALT through STS-4.

We always though that if there was going to be a catastrophic failure, it would be in the software.

[Redleg]

5. Interesting take

I worked for Thiokol Corp. about 5 years after the Challenger accident. We did the in-process chemistry testing on the space shuttle boosters and other solid rocket materials. Interesting work.

The groupthink framework takes into account pressure on dissenters. It was pretty clear that the managers at both Thiokol and NASA put pressure on their engineers to not rock the boat.

[TheBlackAdder]

3. Ah, the Collectivism that Ayn Rand warns about.

.

Collectivism is a value that is characterized by emphasis on cohesiveness among individuals and prioritization of the group over the self. Individuals or groups that subscribe to a collectivist worldview tend to find common values and goals as particularly salient and demonstrate greater orientation toward in-group than toward out-group. The term "in-group" is thought to be more diffusely defined for collectivist individuals to include societal units ranging from the nuclear family to a religious or racial/ethnic group.

.

[Redleg]

6. I thought Ayn Rand was referring to Soviet-style Collectivism

as in their economic system. Though she did go on about the value of "rugged individualism." Screw Ayn Rand and the horse she rode in on.

[canetoad]

4. Committees

Make me long for a benevolent dictatorship.

[Redleg]

7. As an academic and former manager in a business, I am used to committees

Many of our academic and curricular decisions are made by committees, and for good reason. Leaders often don't have the knowledge, perspective, or understanding of the situation to make good decisions. They have to rely on committees (I prefer to call them "task forces" because task forces sound like they get shit done). A good committee chair with a good process and good people can prevent most of the problems associated with committees.

A lousy chair with a lousy process will often lead to wasting time and disgruntled employees.