group thinking
张舒羽-严介和语录
report about group thinking
Introduction
From ancient times to the
present, human beings are social animals. People
living
together to form a mutually dependent
state, and ultimately the formation of society. In
a
society, there are many different
relationships between individuals, and people live
in it will
influence each other, especially
their way of thinking. Groupthink is a new
hypothesis
about making group decisions
proposed by Janis in 1972. It can be explained as
The
thinking mode of the tendency of group
decision making, this is a concept of social
psychology. Janis(1972) insisted that
groupthink have a big impact on many different
kinds of decisions, not only the company's
decision-making, but also the government
decision-making. He also gave some examples to
support his theory, such as the
Watergate
scandal, the accident of space shuttle Challenger,
Bay of pigs, even the
assassination of
President Kennedy. His significant idea is to
prevent the appearance of
groupthink, this is
also occur in some popular management textbooks
and publications
about decision making. But
Unfortunately, this theory has not been well
valued by the
decision makers. To a certain
extent, if the decision makers have been ignoring
the
existence of the problem, it may cause
serious consequences (Moorhead. G et al., 1991).
So, people pay more attention to
groupthink, especially for management in a team.
Managers should have a good analysis of
groupthink, In this article, I will introduce the
definition of groupthink, and then, I will
talk about groupthink symptoms, explain why it is
a
problem, and do some discussion about
groupthink.
Defining Groupthink
Groupthink always happens in a group of
people, it is a social psychology phenomenon. It
is a kind of informal specification that
intended to keep a friendly relationship within
the
group and lead to a tendency of similar
ideas. According to Janis(1982), because of the
desire for harmony and conformity, the member
of a high cohesion group insist that there
must be no mistakes in their decision
.
And in order to maintain the consistency of
groups
on the surface, All members are firmly
in support of the group's decision, And choose to
ignore the information that is inconsistent
with the group idea. In another word, Group
members reduce conflict as far as possible,
they continue to change their ideas in order to
get a consistent action plan. And regardless
of whether this idea or plan is correct, the
group members have no criticism of this. At
the same time, even if there is a critical
opinion of the internal,
they will
actively suppress, also, they refused to accept
the views
of the outside world. Groupthink
have a wide range of influence in different areas,
such as
the field of political science,
management, literature communication studies and
organizational theory(Turner, M. E.;
Pratkanis, A. R. 1998). Generally speaking,
groupthink is a kind of disease that hurts a
lot of groups, it will make observation thinking
ability and moral judgment of Individuals in a
group fall. And also, it will seriously damage
the group performance.
Italy
philosopher Antonio Gramsci first put forward the
concept of groupthink. After that,
William White mentioned the word
groupthink in Fortune magazine in 1952. However,
in
general, most of the research on groupthink
was conducted by psychologist Owen Janis
of
the Yale University, who published an influential
book in 1972, and given a revised
version in
1982. His subsequent research has been constantly
evaluated and optimized
for his group thinking
model. Janis mainly used the bay of pigs and the
Japanese attack
on Pearl Harbor in 1941 as his
two cases to study. After that, a lot of scholars
have done
related research about groupthink.
For example, Flowers(1977), Courtrught(1978) and
Leana(1985).
Here are some
preconditions provided by Moorhead. G et
al.(1991). Cohesive group,
leader preference
and Insulation from experts. First, the group must
be a highly cohesive
group, which means group
members are familiar with each other, there is a
high degree of
team spirit between members,
they may work together for many years. Second,
Leader
preference means group leaders tend to
choose a particular decision. Third, Insulation
from experts means this group is isolated from
the outside world and unable to obtain
external opinions. Moorhead and his Colleague
also use the U.S. Challenger incident as
an
example to prove the rationality of these three
preconditions. Actually, Janis(1982)
pointed
out that in addition to these three, there are
five preconditions: Lack of structured
decision making procedures, the background and
values of the group members are
similar, the
existence of external pressure and time pressure,
the existing scheme is
accepted by influential
leaders lead to this group have no confidence to
find a better
solutions and low self-esteem.
The variables in these conditions also make
groupthink
becomes a problem, I will talk
about it later.
Symptoms of Groupthink
Illusion of invulnerability. When groupthink
happens, most or all of the crew of the
decision-making group is invulnerable
illusion, this illusion let the members completely
oblivious to the obvious mistakes. Also, it
leads to the group over confident and blind
optimism, ignoring the potential danger and
warning, unaware of the dangers of the
decision they made. Finally, it cause the
whole group to take on a huge risk(Moorhead. G
et al., 1991).
collective
rationalization of group's decisions. When
groupthink occurs, the group will try
to
rationalize the decision had been made, also, they
will choose to ignore external
challenges,
opposing views and new ideas. That is to say, once
the groups made a
decision, more is to spend
time on how to rationalize the decision, rather
than to
re-examine and evaluate, even the
group members think about the assumptions again,
they will still have the same idea like before
and make the same decision as the
past(Moorhead. G et al., 1991).
illusion of morality. Members in the group
believe that the decision they made is absolutely
right, there is no ethical problem. So they
often ignore the moral challenge. In an other
words, they usually think that their decisions
and actions is undoubtedly very moral, which
they often neglect their decisions within the
ethical or moral consequences(Moorhead. G
et al., 1991).
Shared
stereotypes of out-group
，
especially
Competitors. When groupthink occurs,
members
will seriously think that any is opposed to their
people or groups of people is
wrong, they even
think their opponents are too weak, stupid,
competitors and cannot
protect themselves,
they insist that the scheme has been obtained of
their group will
achieve a great success.
Furthermore, they think those opponents are
difficult to
communicate and coordinate, so
they disdain to argue with them. They just do what
they
want to do(Moorhead. G et al., 1991).
Direct pressure on dissenters. Groups
with groupthink don't appreciate different
opinions
and views, they always integrate
different views. If there is someone doubt the
decisions
and plans made by the group, this
group always immediately given back. However, they
refute by mockery instead of powerful and
scientific evidence, such as some rude body
language(Janis, 1982). In this case, in order
to obtain the get the group approval, the
majority of people will choose to give up
their original views and keep consistent with the
group when they are In the face of such
ridicule. So that the group lost opportunities for
improvement. There was a famous experiment
made by Asch(1956), he let everybody to
compare the length of line segments. He took a
card with a vertical line, and then let
people
compare the line and another piece of card with 3
lines, he asked people which
line is equal to
the initial line on the first card. Due to the
difference of these lines are
obvious, It is a
very easy judgment. However, after two times the
normal judgment, five
arranged volunteers said
a same wrong answer with one voice
deliberately.
So many of
the
volunteers who had not been notified in advance
were confused. Finally, the
conclusion of this
experiment is that most people have the conformity
tendency. Which
means if a person's opinion is
not consistent with the views of the majority of
people in the
group, they may doubt their own
judgments and correct their views under group
pressure.
Self-censorship. This can also
be said as members withhold criticisms. When group
members have opinions or views significantly
deviated from the consensus, they tend to
review and modify their own ideas, instead of
question group's opinion(Moorhead. G et al.,
1991). Members always keep silent when they
have doubts about the issues raised. They
always ignore their views and doubts. They
think their doubt and refute is not important,
and they have no power to question the
decision made by most people or wisdom of most
people.
Illusion of unanimity. Such
symptoms can be said to be caused by the previous
symptom.
This is the result from pressure and
self repression(Moorhead. G et al., 1991). It is
assumed that all the participants remain
silent are in favor of the views of the majority,
But
this assumption is not true. This wrong
assumption make the community opinion seems
consistent, and the resulting group unified
illusion. Although it just uniformity of the
surface,
but will lead to the group decision
seems reasonable. The illusion of unity caused by
lack
of different views, even can make a lot
of ridiculous and evil action look right.
Mind-guard. Members think themselves
are
the group from negative information. This
is a kind of protection of ideas. Some members
will deliberately detain or hide the
information and data that is not good for group to
make
decisions, or sometimes they limit other
members put forward different views. They think it
can help them keep the legality and effect of
the group decision made by most of
members,
even it is not appropriate(Janis, 1982). For
example, managers stop members
listen to
opinions they think are incorrect.
The
Negative Impact Caused by Groupthink
Exactly,
in the real life, some people think that
organizations are always built to death, one
important reason is groupthink exists widely
in various fields that related to
organizations(Klein, 2000). Groupthink is
really a big challenge, it can result in some bad
consequences in decision-making process(Janis,
1982).
Few alternatives. When groupthink
happens on a group, the number of programs
developed is very small, usually only two,
that is to say no or only a few alternatives.
There is no comprehensive survey of all the
possibilities, if something happens out of the
situation, there is also no way to remedy in a
timely manner.
Failure to re-test
initially rejected alternatives. The team will not
re - examine alternatives
that may be
initially eliminate based on early negative
information in order to strengthen
the group's
position. However some rejected choices may be
useful.
Refusing expert ideas. Group
members are not willing to accept other expert
opinions
especially from out of groups. This
will result in the group cannot organize a
comprehensive study of decision-making
objectives, and also, the information for the
study is very poor, the way they get
information becomes little.
Refusing
negative information. Members always focus on
supporting information, and
ignore any data or
information that may have a negative reaction to
their preferred plan
.
In
this
situation, members will failure to examine risks
of preferred choice, they will
They will
not think of their own program may cause very
serious consequences
.
Also, due to
selective bias in processing information at
hand, they are not aware of the dangers of their
plans, it may bring loss to the whole
organization.
Failure to put forward a
contingency plans. Members will not spend too much
time
discussing the possible results of the
preferred plan, they simply not to estimate what
will
happen, just stubbornly think that their
scheme is correct and feasible. So, they have no
basis for making a remedy. However a incorrect
decision without contingency will bring a
devastating blow to the organization.
Time Pressure and Leadership Style
Because
of the symptoms and defects of groupthink,
Jains(1982) think some key factors
that can
affect the development of groupthink should be
included into a revised framework
of
groupthink. Moorhead, Ference and Neck pointed out
that one of the important
elements should add
into the new model is time, and the other is
leadership styles.
Changes in these two
variables can lead to different circumstances, and
also, make
groupthink become such a problem
for an organization.
First variable is
time, time is always very important for decision-
making process. If a group
has to make a
decision in a extremely short time, it developed
time pressure. As
Jains(1982) argued, time
pressure can influence quality of decision in two
ways. On the
one hand, it affects the
psychological efficiency and judgment of decision
makers, the
ability of them to solve complex
problems and get new information and ideas will be
affected. Also, they may lose the ability to
imagine the consequences and formulate
Alternatives. On the other hand, time pressure
will force the group members to work more
closely together, this makes it more prone to
groupthink according to the antecedent
conditions. So, time pressure can play a role
in the process of selecting, members always
choose to agree and reflect on their own
decisions when face time pressure. For example,
in the space shuttle challenger case, Because
the launch plan has already been
postponed
once(the shuttle cannot launch when Launch
temperature greater than 53
degrees), the cost
increased over time, this group considered about
future funding and
pressure from public and
congress, they had to launch the shuttle as soon
as possible.
Second variable is
leadership style. If the structure of leadership
is simple, the division of
labor within the
team will become less clear, information cannot be
open disclosure, even
no one dare to raise
objections and the performance or decision of
leaders will decide
everything. In this
situation, leaders will make choice according to
their own preferences,
and they will not
evaluate the preferred plan, it will decrease the
groups' ability of critical
appraisal with no
alternatives. However, if the leadership is
shared, the problems
mentioned above may be
solved. Therefore, leadership style does have a
profound
impact on group decision-making
process in some way(Moorhead. G et al., 1991). Use
the same example as before, the leadership
style changed from a shared style into a very
clear style during the space shuttle
challenger program, the leaders just thought about
the
funding while nobody give them other
professional advice.
These two variables
can influence the characteristics of group.
Sometimes, They can
reduce the occurrence of
groupthink but sometimes can also make groupthink
phenomenon more serious in another
way(Janis,1982).
An Example: Bay of Pigs
Janis(1982) use this event as his primary case
to prove his groupthink theory. Bay of pigs
is
a military invasion. In April 17, 1961, some of
the Cuban people who fled to the United
States, with the assistance of the Central
Intelligence Agency, try to land from the bay of
pigs on the southwest coast of Cuba and start
an attack on the government led by Castro.
However, The United States did not succeed.
For the United States this event is Not only
a
failure in the military, but also a political
failure. Domestic and international criticism of
this attack is very strong. Janis thought
groupthink is an important cause of this failure.
This attack plan was launched by the
Eisenhower administration, and Kennedy
administration took it over from the
Eisenhower administration. Although at that time,
some people, such as Arthur Schlesinger and
Senator William Fulbright, show that they
objected to the plan and raised objections,
The Kennedy administration still accepted the
original plan of CIA without criticism.
Kennedy's entire group just ignored these
objections
and think that their plan is moral.
In such an environment, Schlesinger chose to give
up
his own doubt and continue to reflect on
his own point of view. Eventually, the Kennedy
group didn't realize unreasonable part of
hypothesis about Castro and Cuba, they
underestimated the strength of the Castro
administration. Therefore, they
failed(Janis,1972). In this case, groupthink
does exist. In my opinion, these are many
performance of groupthink in this event, such
as the Kennedy government persist in
willfully
and arbitrarily and Schlesinger could not insist
on his opinion because of the
pressure from
the whole team.
Prevention
According
to Aldag and Fuller(1993), groupthink will reduce
the members' ability of critical
thinking, it
is good for any group if they solve this problem.
To address this issue,
Janis(1982) proposed
some advices. First, to leaders, they should
encourage each
member to put forward critical
evaluation of the preferred views. They should
accept
objections and doubt. Also, they should
be impartial and not favor to any position.
Sometimes, it is better for them to absent
some meetings in order to give more space for
members to discuss and to prevent interference
with members' own opinions. Second, the
whole
group should have a certain understanding of
groupthink. They should divided into
several
smaller groups and make sure that they don't
affect each other when making a
decision.
Furthermore, one or more members should be
appointed to act as the role of
opposition,
especially to oppose the views. Third, suggestions
from out of group are also
very important.
Before getting resolution, group members should
ask outside-group
experts to discuss the
group's views and put forward some questions. Each
member
should discuss the preferred view with
a trustworthy person not in the group to get some
comments and new ideas.
Recently, a
lot of new researches provided by different
scholars. Robert Baron (2005)
proposed
groupthink is a ubiquity model, he argued the
antecedents for groupthink of
Janis' theory.
Aldag and Fuller (1993) put forward general group
problem-solving (GGPS)
model which can be
considered as a extension of groupthink model.
Conclusion
Groupthink is an
important problem faced by managers and leaders,
it really exists in all
kind of group
activities. Its symptoms are easy to appear in
daily life. Sometimes, the
consequence of
groupthink is very serious, even a horrible war.
So, people should aware
groupthink, work out
some ways to prevent it and prompt remedy when it
occurs.
Nowadays, more and more people know
about this phenomenon, they will consciously
take some actions to avoid groupthink, it is
good for decision making. Leaders should
distribute work within the group reasonable
and focus on combing internal and external
information. Although it is hard to
completely prevent groupthink, people now have
many
ways to weaken its influence. I hope in
the future, groupthink will not cause any serious
consequences in any field.
Reference
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: a
psychological study of foreign-policy decisions
and fiascoes.
Janis, I. L. (1982).
Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy
decisions and
fiascoes (2nd ed., p. 349).
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Turner, M. E., &
Pratkanis, A. R. (1998). Twenty-five years of
groupthink theory and
research: Lessons from
the evaluation of a theory. Organizational
behavior and human
decision processes, 73(2),
105-115.
Moorhead, G., Ference, R., & Neck,
C. P. (1991). Group decision fiascoes continue:
Space shuttle Challenger and a revised
groupthink Relations, 44(6),
539-550.
Klein, J. I. (2000). Corporate failure by
design: Why organizations are built to fail.
Greenwood Publishing Group.
Aldag, R. J.,
& Fuller, S. R. (1993). Beyond fiasco: A
reappraisal of the groupthink
phenomenon and a
new model of group decision logical Bulletin,
113(3),
533.
Asch, Solomon E. (1956)
‘Studies of independence and conformity: A
minority of one
against a unanimous majority’.
Psychological Monographs: General and Applied 709:
1-70.
Baron, R. S. (2005). So right it's
wrong: Groupthink and the ubiquitous nature of
polarized
group decision making. Advances in
experimental social psychology, 37, 219-253.