The Concept of Groupthink - Example

Name: Tutor: Title: The Concept of Groupthink, why and in what circumstances is it such a problem for organizations Course: Date: Word count: 2000 Introduction Decision-making is regarded as an integral aspect of a team activity. Studies indicate that group decision-making is implemented through a sequence of activities which include gathering and interpreting as well as exchanging the information, and adopting and identifying alternative ways of action. It also involves deciding upon alternatives by integrating the different perspectives and views presented by team members, and making a choice and monitoring the associated consequences. However, at times teams can take a flawed direction by simply failing to exchange enough information, making erroneous conclusions as well as inadequately exploring alternatives. The pitfall of such kind of decision-making is referred to as groupthink Behl 2012, as cited in Thompson (2008, p.166). Groupthink is a concept perceived by Irving Janis (1972), a social psychologist as something that happens when a group involves in making faulty decisions due to group pressures that also cause deterioration of “mental efficiency, moral judgment as well as reality testing” (p.9). Generally, groups subjected to groupthink have a tendency of ignoring alternatives, and thus end up taking unreasonable actions which in most cases dehumanize other groups. Therefore, groups which have no access to outside opinions, lack clear rules to govern their decision making and whose members have similar backgrounds are considered to be vulnerable to groupthink (Janis 1972). Groupthink is also defined by Janis (1982) as the psychological need for consensus particularly in circumstances that suppresses disagreement to level that thinking of alternatives is regarded as minor approach to cohesive decision-making in a group. It also regarded as a mode of thinking where individuals in a cohesive group engage in particularly when concurrence-seeking is seen as more important than realistic view of alternative actions that can be taken to solve the problem. The symptoms of groupthink are seem when the affected members involved in decision making in a group are motivated to avoid being strict on appraising the leadership style of their leaders as well as the ideas of their colleagues. This suggests that individuals in a group tend to adopt a soft way of criticizing, and try to avoid conflicts whilst thinking on their own. As they gather at meetings, for example, all members of a group are seen to be amiable and tend to seek total concurrence that in most cases is recognized erroneously as a way of building consensus on all crucial issues (Dobbs 2013). It worthwhile to note that conformity is an element of groupthink that increases with increase in group cohesiveness. Therefore, group tends to become more cohesive which in turn increases the inner compulsion on each member to find it useless creating disunity. This makes all individuals in a group believe in the significance of whatever suggestions put forward by their leaders or a number of members of a group. The common symptoms practiced by victims of groupthink include; sharing of an illusion of unanimity about judgments expressed by group members who focus on favouring the majority ideas, self-censorship and invulnerability, direct pressure on any member who from time to time show doubts about the group’s shared illusions, the habit of holding stereotyped suggestions of key enemy groups. Over and above, victims of groupthink develop mind-guards to cover their leaders as well as other members against diverse information that is considered detrimental to the complacency already shared about the importance and morality of the past decisions in the group (Janis 1971). The different problems attributed to groupthink makes a topic of concern for contemporary studies on decision making errors. The key group decision making issues associated with groupthink include poor analysis of decision objectives, inadequacy of taking into consideration all alternatives as a way of maintaining unanimity, the habit of searching information that is in most cases insufficient or biased and lack of proper evaluation of risks associated with the solution alternative decided upon by the members of a group (Janis 1982). Why, and in what сirсumstаnсеs, is groupthink such а рrоblеm for оrgаnizаtiоns? Although groupthink is not all that negative occurrence, however, in extreme circumstances groupthink can lead to disastrous consequences. Groupthink inhibits group members from making effective decisions because concurrence seeking tends to be a common aspect in a cohesive group which in turn makes it hard for the group to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. Therefore, groupthink makes the victim members less attentive to information appraisal, processing and thus the end result is lack of inclusive rationalization (Janis 1972). The fundamental question here is whether groupthink is really detrimental to any organizational team’s performance. In order to effectively understand team performance, Choi and Kim (1999, p.298) compared groupthink in terms of cognitive functions and behavioural functions of teams in an organization. Generally, the authors’ main objective was to quantitatively understand the key symptoms of groupthink in relation to defective decision making within the organizational settings. From the general problem-solving perspective, cognitive functions in particular means decision making while behavioural function are a reflection of decision implementation. However, by comparing the two functions, it is important to note that behavioural functions in relation to cognitive functions can directly affect the performance outcome of a team in an organization. This is because behavioural functions have an element of temporal closeness. In circumstances where implementation of decision fails, it means that the outcome becomes fiasco irrespective of quality of existing decision-making process. It is notable that behavioural functions are closely associated with outcome compared to cognitive functions. By assessing the difference between internal and external activities within the context of organizational teams, the authors intended to have a complete and balanced idea on the various set of team activities (Choi & Kim 1999). Groupthink suppresses personal thought and in such circumstances innovation becomes a casualty. This makes organizations incapable of responding to the dynamic market trends. In particular, companies subjected to stressful internal or external conditions or deviates from the usual procedure are most affected by the dangers of groupthink. In addition, organizations characterized with a homogenous work force tend to face the negative effects of groupthink more than those that embrace multiculturalism (Blank 2014). From the groupthink and temporary organizations perspective, it can be noted that group verbalizations or self-talk of a group can affect the group performance. In a cohesive self-managing team, members develop a tendency of exerting pressure on fellow members who verbalize ideas that are seen to be deviating from the main opinion put forward by the group. Mostly, the pressure is exerted to avoid deviant members from disrupting the consensus of their entire group. It should be noted that such pressure to maintain conformity within the group’s dialogue seem to discourage constructive critical analysis, and thus can make the group to involve in defective decision making (Golkara 2013, p.231). In groupthink, members of a group tend to maintain consensus, indicating that only a few courses of action are taken into consideration. This is simply because the group spends a considerable amount of time to argue for the plan rather than being optimistic about and against the plan that makes the group to overlook the related setbacks. As a result, the group fails to prepare contingency plans for its future problems (Hustedde 2011). Groupthink and its effects in an organization has been the main topic of most forms of corporate analysis. Although companies seem to benefit more from workplace collaboration particularly during teaming up, it is crucial for the leadership handle it with great care so as to avoid the effects of groupthink. The fundamental question here is how groupthink can affect an organization. The key circumstances under which groupthink is considered a problem for organization is when creativity becomes stifled and poor decisions are made because nobody opposes them. It is notable that when people work as a group for a long period of time, there is a tendency of groupthink being seen as a threat to discourage creativity. On the other hand, groupthink can make the group members to develop an overwhelming desire for them to make unanimous decisions. When groupthink replaces what is initially considered as effective collaboration, it jeopardizes an organization’s profitability because critical thinking is not applied to analyze situations properly. Thus, profitability levels of an organization are set to fall because group members tend to become overconfident rather than properly vetting their decision (Dobbs 2013). According to Sikula (2009, p.260) and Breger (2010, p.58) “the negative effects of groupthink result from weak leadership.” This is because the leaders involved do not necessarily give their groups unique opportunities for creativity and mislead the group with negative stereotyping. The concept of groupthink is perceived as a negative model in most of the organizations. However, studies from various scholarly articles indicates that although groupthink seems to be extremely negative, its positive aspects can increase the moral, goodwill and the productivity level of an organization. Caulfield and Smith (2009, p.16) states that “Groupthink is a major cause of countless mistakes made at management level.” This implies that both leadership and stakeholder management greatly affect the level of groupthink within an organization. The general symptoms of groupthink that lead to negative decision-making particularly in the workplace or among teams of employees includes; failure to consider the importance of contingency plans, an illusion of group invulnerability and belief in its inherent morality, an illusion of unanimity and collective rationalization of ideas (Pautz & Forrer 2013). Groupthink is a condition considered to be difficult to break because there are hurdles to cross and many challenges to overcome. Thus, it becomes hard to overcome or reduce the negative effects associated with groupthink particularly in the workplace. Individuals in leadership positions, therefore, should utilize different strategies to solve the problem by creating clearer and well-refined and more diverse means of thinking in their workplaces. Encouraging critical thinking is perceived to be an appropriate way to eliminate the problem of groupthink in an organization because it promotes critical and unbiased thinking. It is vital for leadership to continuously encourage their team members to develop critical thinking whilst making unbiased view about their comments. Furthermore, leadership should promote working environment that welcomes team members to freely express any doubts and divergence they may be thinking of to be useful (Goessl 2010). Depending on the type of leadership style used in the organization, too much advice is considered a major that can cause policy deadlock. On the other hand, groupthink is associated with the dangers that are currently considered as standard fare particularly within the leadership training programs as well as in widely accepted explanations intended for policy-making fiascoes. In addition, efforts directed towards avoiding groupthink from occurring, can as well cause a more dangerous problem-deadlock (Kowert 2002).0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Conclusion Based on the above discussion, it can be concluded that groupthink makes a group to desire for conformity and unanimity which in turn overrides the members’ ability to decide effectively. It is apparent that groups subjected to groupthink often develop a tendency of ignoring alternatives, and thus end up taking unreasonable actions which dehumanize other groups. It is worthwhile to note that when groupthink replaces what is basically considered as effective collaboration, it jeopardizes profitability level of an organization because critical thinking is not applied to analyze situations properly. Encouraging critical thinking is a key approach to eliminating the problem of groupthink in an organization because it promotes critical and unbiased thinking. Although groupthink seems to be not all that negative occurrence, it should be noted that in extreme circumstances groupthink can lead to disastrous consequences. One of the common circumstances under which groupthink is considered a problem for organization is when creativity becomes stifled and poor decisions are made because nobody opposes them. Generally, when people work as a group for quite a long period of time, there is a tendency of groupthink to as a threat to discourage creativity. The main problem of groupthink is that it inhibits group members from making effective decisions. This is simply because concurrence seeking often becomes common aspect within a cohesive group, and a result it appears hard for the group to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. List of References Behl, A. D, 2012, Groupthink: The Role of Leadership in Enhancing and Mitigating the Pitfall in Team Decision-Making, Northwestern University. Berger, M., 2010, ‘Analyzing the institutional cultural of family courts through the lens of social psychology Groupthink theory’, Law & Psychology Review, Vol.34, 55-90. Blank, C., 2014, “How can Groupthink affect an organization?” Demand Media. Retrieved November 13, 2014 from, Caulfield, P. & Smith, N., 2009, If you ask me, Engineering & Technology, Vol.4, No.7, 16. Choi, N.J & Kim,M., 1999, ‘The organizational application of Groupthink and its limitations in Organizations’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.84, No.2, pp.297-306. Dobbs, J., 2013, “Is groupthink poisoning your organization?” Retrieved November 13, 2014 from, Goessl, L., 2010, “How to reduce the negative effects of Groupthink in the workplace.” Retrieved November 13, 2014 from, Golkar, H., 2013, ‘Groupthink principles and fundamentals in organizations’, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Vol.5, No.8, pp.225-237. Hustedde, R., 2011, Recognizing and Overcoming False Consensus in Groups and Organizations, The University of Kentucky, U.K. Janis, I.L., 1971, Groupthink, Psychology Today, New York: Houghton Mifflin. Janis, I.L., 1972, Victims of Groupthink; a Psychological Study of Foreign-policy Decisions and Fiascoes, Boston, Houghton, Mifflin. Janis, I.L., 1982, Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.  Kowert, P.A., 2002, Groupthink or deadlock: When do leaders learn from their advisors?  Blackwell Publishing, Albany. Pautz, A.J & Forrer, A.D., 2013, ‘The Dynamics of Groupthink: The Cape Coral Experience’, Hodges University, U.S.A, Journal of International Energy Policy, Vol.2, No.1, pp.1-13. Sikula, A., 2009, ‘Moral management methodology/mythology: Erroneous ethical equations’, Ethics & Behaviour, Vol.19, No.3, pp.253-261. Read More