Case Study: The Practice of Effective Communication Skills to Improve Group Think Dynamics and Unleash Human Potential

Organizations use group think as a way to organize ideas and collaborate with each other to form solutions to problems. The goal for the most part is to motivate creative idea sharing but the drawback to groupthink is conformity that limits the expression of unique ideas. I have noticed that I feel pressure to agree with someone's ideas in order to move the process along. If we were all to challenge each other's ideas we would never come to conclusions. Organization are using group think as tool when in fact it is not useful to effective decision making.

Statement of the Problem:

There are a few main issues with how groupthink works. Some people will decide to agree with the group for fear of their own ideas being rejected. These fears may stem from previous rejections or negative reactions to ones ideas in the past. In my organization, Groupthink has become more of a hindrance to creative expression that a useful tool.

Analysis:

Groupthink in my organization would have to be totally revamped to be productive or effective. As it works now, groupthink is not a useful decision making tool. One of the main issues that has been identified as a hindrance is the people that are concurence-seeking. This is characterized by the loss of harsh constructive criticism towards management and eventually loss of self-criticism. This results in the thinking that "all ideas are good ideas" (Janis, 1971). The drawback to this thinking is that ideas are not challenged and better ones created. The plus side of this thinking is that all ideas are accepted but this is not the case in most situations.

Another hindrance to effective groupthink is the Kill mentality towards other groups. Some departments are our "enemies". All ideas brought up by this group are denied and explained away. This mentality results in the overlooking of crucial ideas in the hopes that the company will avoid embarrassment (Janis, 1971). The ideas that are shut down are ones that would cause the organization to omit some fault that could make them look incompetent (Janis, 1971).

In contrast to the Kill mentality is conformity. People make efforts to conform in social situations as to increase their group's cohesiveness (Janis, 1971). People that conform are the same ones that seek concurrence. These people fail to object to outlandish ideas to the detriment of the company (Janis, 1971). It has been proven in laboratory experiments that the poorest decisions were made by high cohesive groups without adequate decision procedures , while the highest quality decisions were made in moderately cohesive groups (Callaway & Esser, 1984).

Another aspect of why groupthink is ineffective is the pride that each person has within the group. Pride is not necessarily a bad thing but it can hinder productive thought when members perceive themselves as infallible and thus don't make safe decisions. This extra accumulated risk exacerbates the root problems (Janis, 1971).

Groupthink as a standard does not offer in great incentives for one to produce any great ideas. In fact, groupthink foster's a group mentality in which people feel obligated to agree with their peers (Callaway & Esser, 1984). Without incentives for creative idea people generally will resort to doing the least amount of work in general so they will be more likely to conform in order to speed up the process (McGregor, 1957). People generally lack ambition and dislike responsibility. People are also indifferent to what's best for the organization and naturally very resistant to change. These are all the reasons that incentives are needed and without them people will fall back to human nature inclinations (McGregor, 1957).

Recommendations:

The main causes of why groupthink has failed have been identified. The best way to deal with concurrence is to assign each member the task of critical evaluator. This will allow them to express objections and seriously accept and pass judgment (Janis, 1971). Another way to avoid concurrence to the manager is to disguise or hide the intent and ideals of the manager. Multiple groups thinking on the same idea is a good way to avoid the impact of one group leader's influence. Additionally, an outside group should also be convened to think on the same topic. This will allow for multiple perspectives (Janis, 1971).

To counteract the kill mentality, the group leader should pause before conclusion and make it known that all expressed final decisions will be discussed with the people that will be impacted whether inside or outside the department. This will establish the notion that all ideas need to be copacetic to all persons (Janis, 1971). Another way to motivate rational, intellectual, creative ideas is to bring in an expert to challenge the current consensus. This will inspire groupthinking to develop well-thought out ideas that will consider all objections without the criticism coming from someone they know personally (Janis, 1971).

One way to motivate and inspire people to produce creative ideas is to create empowerment and accountability. These people need to understand that they are accountable to the ultimate decision and their input will have a direct impact as to what that decision will be. The team members need to be empowered with the rights to express themselves without the risk of rejection or unfounded criticism. The task of the other group members will be to consider each idea and take from it what they can use. They too should be held accountable and thus encouraged to participate in the analysis of each idea (Ulrich, Kerr & Ashkensus, 2002).

A great way to offer team members time to marinate on their decisions and second guess themselves, is to hold a follow-up meeting for that reason alone. This meeting will allow everyone a chance to express regrets or ideas that came up after the initial meeting's conclusion (Janis, 1971). Team members may have morally decided to change their mind or factually decided on a better method, either way, a second chance meeting allows time for serious decision making.

Conclusion:

Groupthink can be a useful tool in decision making if it is used correctly. Some of the main hindrances to it's effectiveness is conformity, group concurrence, stress, and fear. There are numerous ways improve groupthink. Fear can be eliminated by expecting one to be critical, bring analytical ideas and pass judgment. Group conformity can removed if there is no idea to conform to and the leader's ideals are hidden. Bringing in outside sources is a great way to bring in new perspectives and open mindedness. In conclusion, don't give up on groupthink, alter it.

References

Callaway, M. & Esser, J. (1984) Groupthink: Effects of Cohesiveness and Problem-Solving

Procedures on Group Decision Making. Social Behavior & Personality. Vol. 12, Issue 2.

pp. 157-164.

Janis, I. (1971). Groupthink: The Desperate Drive for Consensus at any Cost in Classics of

Organization Theory (6th ed.). Harcourt Press. PP. 185-197.

McGregor, D.M. (1957). The Human Side of Enterprise in Classics of Organization Theory (6th

ed.). Harcourt Press. PP. 179-184.

Ulrich, D., Kerr, S. & Ashkensus R. (2002). Why Work-Outs Work: The Underlying Principles in

The Organizational Behavior Reader (8th ed.). Prentice Hall. Pp.362-369.