The Pitfalls of Groupthink

Allow diverse thinkers to collaborate—and make mistakes.

Cover photo: @jerrysilfwer

Groupthink is a chal­lenge for intern­al communications.

Groupthink is a psy­cho­lo­gic­al phe­nomen­on where the desire for har­mony and con­form­ity with­in a group leads to irra­tion­al or dys­func­tion­al decision-mak­ing outcomes. 

The phe­nomen­on occurs when group mem­bers sup­press dis­sent­ing view­points, pri­or­it­ise con­sensus over crit­ic­al eval­u­ation, and are influ­enced by the group’s over­rid­ing desire to main­tain a cohes­ive social identity.

Here we go:

Groupthink and Poor Decision-Making

Groupthink is a concept in organ­isa­tion­al beha­viour. It sug­gests that when a group’s cohes­ive­ness is overly depend­ent on its mem­bers’ per­son­al appeal, it is more likely to lead to poor decision-making.

Such a basis for cohe­sion can over­shad­ow ration­al, crit­ic­al think­ing and lead to con­sensus-seek­ing at the cost of con­sid­er­ing diverse view­points or altern­at­ive solutions.

Groupthink the­ory sug­gests poor decision-mak­ing is most likely when group cohe­sion is based on per­son­al attract­ive­ness of mem­bers, but broad­er and con­sist­ent use of group dynam­ics research can advance under­stand­ing of decision-mak­ing prob­lems.”
Source: Organisational beha­vi­or and human decision pro­cesses 1McCauley, C. (1998). Group Dynamics in Janis’s Theory of Groupthink: Backward and Forward. Organisational beha­vi­or and human decision pro­cesses, 73 23, … Continue read­ing

Effective intern­al com­mu­nic­a­tion strategies can intro­duce struc­tured meth­ods for decision-mak­ing, such as soli­cit­ing anonym­ous feed­back, encour­aging debate, and ensur­ing the rep­res­ent­a­tion of diverse per­spect­ives in meet­ings and discussions. 

In essence, intern­al com­mu­nic­a­tions enable organ­isa­tions to make well-con­sidered, innov­at­ive, and effect­ive decisions by fos­ter­ing a cul­ture of open com­mu­nic­a­tion and crit­ic­al evaluation.

Groupthink and Internal Communications

Internal com­mu­nic­a­tions shape an organisation’s cul­ture, foster open dia­logue, and ensure diverse view­points are heard and considered. 

When group­think pre­vails, it leads to a uni­form­ity of thought that stifles cre­ativ­ity and innovation. 

This phe­nomen­on is haz­ard­ous in a cor­por­ate set­ting where crit­ic­al decisions must bal­ance vari­ous per­spect­ives and risks. 

The tend­ency to con­form to the major­ity view or the opin­ion of cha­ris­mat­ic lead­ers, often driv­en by a desire to main­tain har­mony or cohe­sion with­in the team, can res­ult in over­look­ing poten­tial prob­lems, fail­ing to explore altern­at­ive strategies, and mak­ing sub­op­tim­al decisions. 

Internal com­mu­nic­a­tions can help pre­vent the insu­lar think­ing that leads to group­think by pro­mot­ing a cul­ture of open­ness and psy­cho­lo­gic­al safety, where employ­ees feel com­fort­able express­ing their views without fear of retribution.

Therefore, intern­al com­mu­nic­a­tions must act­ively cul­tiv­ate an envir­on­ment where dis­sent­ing opin­ions are val­ued and crit­ic­al think­ing is encour­aged, thereby mit­ig­at­ing the risks asso­ci­ated with groupthink.

Why Groups Are Sensitive To Pressure

Groups are par­tic­u­larly sus­cept­ible to pres­sure due to their inher­ent desire to main­tain a pos­it­ive social iden­tity. This desire often leads to group­think, where the col­lect­ive effort to pre­serve cohe­sion and avoid dis­ap­prov­al can res­ult in poor decision-making.

Groupthink is a col­lect­ive effort to main­tain social iden­tity, with groups mak­ing poor decisions when faced with poten­tial neg­at­ive views, but pro­du­cing high­er qual­ity decisions when giv­en an excuse for poor per­form­ance.”
Source: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2Turner, M., Pratkanis, A., Probasco, P., & Leve, C. (1992). Threat, Cohesion, and Group Effectiveness: Testing a Social Identity Maintenance Perspective on Groupthink. Journal of Personality and … Continue read­ing

This is espe­cially true when the group per­ceives a threat of oppos­ing views from extern­al sources. In such scen­ari­os, the pres­sure to con­form and main­tain a uni­fied front can over­ride indi­vidu­al judg­ment and crit­ic­al think­ing, lead­ing to decisions pri­or­it­ising group har­mony over the qual­ity of the outcome.

Interestingly, groups can pro­duce high­er-qual­ity decisions when they have an excuse for poten­tially poor per­form­ance. This implies that when the pres­sure of main­tain­ing a flaw­less image alle­vi­ates, group mem­bers feel more lib­er­ated to express diverse opin­ions and engage in crit­ic­al and cre­at­ive thinking. 

Avoiding Groupthink in Organisations

For intern­al com­mu­nic­a­tions, there are mainly two crit­ic­al suc­cess factors for min­im­ising group­think in organisations:

  • Psychological group diversity. Diversity is often linked to demo­graph­ic­al attrib­utes (sexu­al ori­ent­a­tion, eth­ni­city, gender, etc.). But psy­cho­lo­gic­al diversity is key to pro­duct­ive and effi­cient groups (oppos­ing views, crit­ic­al think­ing, cre­at­ive ideas, etc.).
  • High tol­er­ance for pro­duct­ive mis­takes. Negative pres­sure will likely induce poor decision-mak­ing in the group. Instead, encour­age a cul­ture of pro­duct­ive mis­takes and focus on pro­mot­ing error cor­rec­tion (“Fail fast, fail often”).

The Checklist for Communicative Leadership

Being a great lead­er can be daunt­ing. However, with effort (and atten­tion to detail), all lead­ers can prac­tice express­ive and pre­cise communication.

George Bernard Shaw

The single biggest prob­lem in com­mu­nic­a­tion is the illu­sion that it has taken place.”

How can you ensure your lead­er­ship is express­ive and pre­cise in prac­tic­al situations? 

As a rule of thumb:

It’s gen­er­ally bet­ter to “over-com­mu­nic­ate” (tol­er­able added effort) than “under-com­mu­nic­ate” (sub­stan­tial added risk).

Make sure to pass these com­mu­nic­at­ive lead­er­ship checks:

  • This is what we are doing.
    Is the explan­a­tion clear? Do you have ques­tions? Can you repeat the inform­a­tion back to me?
  • This is why we are doing it.
    Is the explan­a­tion clear? Do you have ques­tions? Can you repeat the inform­a­tion back to me?
  • This is who will be doing it.
    Is the explan­a­tion clear? Do you have ques­tions? Can you repeat the inform­a­tion back to me?
  • This is how we are doing it.
    Is the explan­a­tion clear? Do you have ques­tions? Can you repeat the inform­a­tion back to me?
  • This is when we are doing it.
    Is the explan­a­tion clear? Do you have ques­tions? Can you repeat the inform­a­tion back to me?
  • This is where we are doing it.
    Is the explan­a­tion clear? Do you have ques­tions? Can you repeat the inform­a­tion back to me?
  • This is for whom we are doing it.
    Is the explan­a­tion clear? Do you have ques­tions? Can you repeat the inform­a­tion back to me?

Expressive and pre­cise com­mu­nic­a­tion styles have a stronger link to lead­er out­comes than per­son­al­ity traits extra­ver­sion and con­scien­tious­ness.”
Source: Human Performance 3Bakker-Pieper, A., & Vries, R. (2013). The Incremental Validity of Communication Styles Over Personality Traits for Leader Outcomes. Human Performance, 26, 1 — … Continue read­ing

Communicative Leadership (Infographic)

Learn more: The Checklist for Communicative Leadership


Jerry Silfwer - Doctor Spin - Spin Factory - Public Relations

THANKS FOR READING.
Need PR help? Hire me here.

Signature - Jerry Silfwer - Doctor Spin

What should you study next?

Spin Academy | Online PR Courses
Free Introduction PR Course - Doctor Spin - Public Relations Blog
Free psy­cho­logy PR course.

Spin’s PR School: Free Psychology PR Course

Join this free Psychology PR Course to learn essen­tial skills tailored for pub­lic rela­tions pro­fes­sion­als. Start now and amp­li­fy your impact on soci­ety today.

Psychology in Public Relations
Group Psychology

Learn more: All Free PR Courses

💡 Subscribe and get a free ebook on how to get bet­ter PR.

Logo - Spin Academy - Online PR Courses

Annotations
Annotations
1 McCauley, C. (1998). Group Dynamics in Janis’s Theory of Groupthink: Backward and Forward. Organisational beha­vi­or and human decision pro­cesses, 73 23, 142 – 62. https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​0​0​6​/​O​B​H​D​.​1​9​9​8​.​2​759
2 Turner, M., Pratkanis, A., Probasco, P., & Leve, C. (1992). Threat, Cohesion, and Group Effectiveness: Testing a Social Identity Maintenance Perspective on Groupthink. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 781 – 796. https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​0​3​7​/​0​022 – 3514.63.5.781
3 Bakker-Pieper, A., & Vries, R. (2013). The Incremental Validity of Communication Styles Over Personality Traits for Leader Outcomes. Human Performance, 26, 1 — 19. https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​0​8​0​/​0​8​9​5​9​2​8​5​.​2​0​1​2​.​7​3​6​900
Jerry Silfwer
Jerry Silfwerhttps://doctorspin.net/
Jerry Silfwer, alias Doctor Spin, is an awarded senior adviser specialising in public relations and digital strategy. Currently CEO at Spin Factory and KIX Communication Index. Before that, he worked at Whispr Group NYC, Springtime PR, and Spotlight PR. Based in Stockholm, Sweden.

The Cover Photo

The cover photo isn't related to public relations obviously; it's just a photo of mine. Think of it as a 'decorative diversion', a subtle reminder that it's good to have hobbies outside work.

The cover photo has

.

Subscribe to SpinCTRL—it’s 100% free!

Join 2,550+ fellow PR lovers and subscribe to Jerry’s free newsletter on communication and psychology.
What will you get?

> PR commentary on current events.
> Subscriber-only VIP content.
> My personal PR slides for .key and .ppt.
> Discounts on upcoming PR courses.
> Ebook on getting better PR ideas.
Subscribe to SpinCTRL today by clicking SUBSCRIBE and get your first free send-out instantly.

Latest Posts
Similar Posts
Most Popular