Groupthink and the Need for Diversity

Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when the desire for consensus in a decision making group overrides the members’ motivation to realistically appraise alternatives. From the smallest group up to large organisations, groupthink can reduce creativity, inhibit innovation and result in sub-optimal performance, possibly even to the point of self-destruction (cf. Enron etc.) Why does this happen and how can it be avoided?

In an article by Powell, “Stop Groupthink Damaging Your Business”, Finance and Management, ICAEW, November 2011, the author draws on the original work by Janis and cites three “antecedent” conditions to groupthink: 1/ High group cohesiveness; 2/ Structural faults (such as insulation, lack of impartial leadership and sociological and/or ideological homogeneity); and 3/ Situational context (such as highly stressful external threats, recent failures and difficult decision-making processes).

Here are the symptoms and possible solutions followed by further implications (“et alors”).

Groupthink and the Need for Diversity

According to Janis, there are eight symptoms of groupthink:

1. Illusions of invulnerability creating excessive optimism.
2. Unquestioning belief in the morality of the group.
3. Rationalising warnings that might challenge the group’s assumptions.
4. Stereotyping those who are opposed to the group as weak, spiteful, ignorant…
5. Self-censorship of ideas that deviate from the group consensus.
6. Illusions of unanimity where silence is viewed as agreement.
7. Direct pressure to conform placed on any “disloyal” members of the group.
8. Self-appointed members, “mind guards”, shield the group from dissenting information.

Taking these into account and reviewing current research, Powell suggests various solutions:

1. Encourage diversity
2. Avoid directive leadership
3. Embrace the culture of enquiry
4. Don’t chase consensus; rather explore disagreements
5. Do not isolate yourself from the ideas of others
6. Discuss issues in the spirit of openness
7. Avoid converging on an answer too quickly
8. Learn to deal with ambiguity

Et alors?

When seeing that sociological and/or ideological homogeneity is an antecedent for groupthink, it seems almost obvious that diversity is a solution; however is an “injection” of diversity an immediate remedy? On a small group basis: probably yes – diversify the members and groupthink might evaporate. On a large organisation basis: perhaps not – diversity might be prevalent in the organisation but it still might not be immediately included in the decision making groups.

When the decision of who can join the decision making group is subject to groupthink itself then the organisation is probably never going to benefit from increased diversity; instead the group will self-replicate and groupthink will continue.  This is evidenced in many organisations where the diversity at entry level is very high but then steadily diminishes in direct inverse relation to seniority in the organisation.

Diversity is not just about nationality and gender: it is also about beliefs, values and behaviours. An organisation can therefore have lots of visible sociological diversity but very little ideological diversity. The organisation believes it is diverse but is only recruiting into its upper ranks new members who share the same ideology as the former members despite their nationality or gender.

Another form of diversity is to be found in different leadership styles. If there is only one leadership style and that is principally directive then dissent, discussion and open review are unlikely to be encouraged; instead the risks of groupthink and diversity exclusion are both increased. Diversity is needed to remedy groupthink; but for it to have an effect in large organisations, diverse leadership is also needed.