Page 287 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

270 Chapter 10

Self-censorship and the illusion of vulnerability were the two most significant
factors contributing to the failure of the umpires’ chosen negotiating strategy.
20
Second, the group members have a shared illusion of unanimity, manifested by
the amount of simple agreement discovered by Cline. Because individuals do
21
not express doubts openly, the members think they all agree. Consensus is
22
assumed rather than tested and obtained. Third, a member who does venture a
contradictory opinion will experience direct pressure from the rest of the group
to conform: “Why are you being so negative, Jim? The rest of us think it’s a good
idea.” The group may also have a number of self-appointed mindguards who
“protect” the group by deliberately preventing dissonant information from
reaching the group—by stopping outsiders from addressing the group, failing to
mention contrasting points of view contained in research materials, and so forth.
Finally, in groups with rigid status hierarchies, lower-status members are less
likely to contradict higher-status members and will avoid issues they think may
produce conflict. These conformity pressures are especially dangerous when a
23
group must achieve consensus. The need for consensus can lead to an “agreement
norm,” which curtails disagreement, ultimately causing the decision to suffer. 24

Preventing Groupthink Critical thinking is the responsibility of all group members.
Here are specific suggestions to help prevent groupthink:
1. Each member should assume the role of critical evaluator.
Every member should use his or her best critical thinking skills on behalf of the
group. Occasionally, the group may assign a specific individual to serve as a
devil’s advocate or reminder, who is charged with constructively criticizing the
ideas brought to the group. Ideally, this role rotates among members so that the
criticism doesn’t become associated with a particular individual.
2. Independent subgroups can be formed to work on or evaluate the same issue.
The competition of rival subgroups, even friendly ones, can make the subgroups
more careful and thorough in their work. In addition, the clash between
subgroups can spark novel or creative solutions.
3. The group should prevent its own insulation from outside information.
Members who serve as mindguards keep what they perceive as contradictory
information away from the other members of the group, but sometimes this
information is exactly what can benefit the group and prevent a disastrous
decision! The registration staff didn’t seek feedback from anyone but themselves
in making the decision. The MLB umpires never once consulted with their
spouses or lawyers. Their chosen strategy neglected the fact that legally they
could not rescind their resignations once MLB received them. 25
Leaders, in particular, can take steps to offset insularity. They can
encourage members to get feedback on tentative proposals from trusted
associates outside the group, then report back to the group. Leaders can also
arrange for outside experts to discuss their views with the group, thereby helping
to ensure a broadly based foundation for making the decision.

gal37018_ch10_259_290.indd 270 3/30/18 11:14 AM