Social Psychology concept of Groupthink Essay Example

situations. It offers benefits beyond problem-solving, aiding in planning, decision-making, and communication among various departments within the organization. Groupthink also enables social centers to accomplish tasks that would be impossible for individuals alone, contributing to their overall effectiveness. However, it's important to recognize the potential negative impact of groupthink on a group's work as it can have severe consequences - even resulting in loss of life. Highly cohesive groups may prioritize maintaining unanimity over evaluating all options and alternatives. Therefore, understanding the conditions that give rise to groupthink is crucial.

This implies that effective groups must possess mutual trust among participants, clearly defined objectives, external training and support, and shared accountability. Many signs could indicate that groupthink is occurring in the decision-making procedure. Groups dominated by groupthink tend to make unethical decisions as compared to those made using a rational decision-making approach. Many groups suffer from the illusion of invulnerability, assuming they cannot make wrong decisions, and closed-mindedness, particularly regarding a specific situation.

According to Janis (1982), highly cohesive groups often engage in groupthink, leading them to disregard information that does not align with their collective opinions. This can result in a focus on maintaining positive group dynamics over making realistic decisions. Symptoms of groupthink include an illusion of invulnerability, collective rationalization, unquestioned morality, excessive negative stereotyping, strong conformity pressure, self-censorship of dissenting ideas, illusion of unanimity, and self-appointed mind guards. The illusion of invulnerability arises from ignoring obvious signals and being overly optimistic about extreme tasks. Collective rationalization occurs when the group dismisses warning signals that contradict their current thinking. Unquestioned morality involves the belief that the group's positions are inherently ethical and moral while opposing

views are evil.

Excessive negative stereotyping occurs when one views the opposing side as bad or unimportant. Strong conformity pressure discourages dissenting opinions, risking expulsion for disloyalty. Self-censorship of dissenting ideas, accompanied by counterarguments, is known as withholding. The illusion of unanimity arises when false beliefs about judgments are shared and everyone agrees. Self-appointed mind guards protect groups from negative and threatening information that could affect their performance. Strong loyalty amongst groups can lead to ignoring useful information from various sources, and prove challenging to the groups' decision making processes (Kowert, 2002).

Janis' study on groupthink revealed that this process occurs when decision makers develop strong solidarity amongst themselves, which clouds their vision and suppresses conflicting views and negative feelings towards proposals. This can result in irrational decision making, even among intelligent and competent individuals working as a team. Groupthink also overestimates morality and power, creates pressures for conformity, and encourages risky behavior while ignoring ethical concerns. Members may also unite around a person or policy without questioning basic assumptions, leading to poor strategic planning and conflicts within the organization.

The reason behind groupthink can be attributed to two main factors. Firstly, decision-makers in groups often assume that they are solely responsible for an organization's achievements and overlook the contributions of others who may have implemented and managed changes. Secondly, these groups tend to believe that their emotionally connected nature leads them to make superior decisions, when in reality they are self-serving and arrogant. They usually ignore information that contradicts their fundamental assumptions and reject dissenting individuals as non-team players.

To combat groupthink, organizations can take steps such as encouraging diverse perspectives and promoting open communication where everyone has

a chance to participate. However, high levels of cohesiveness combined with long-term solidarity and minimal turnover may lead to dysfunction within the group and even negatively impact organizational performance.

Preventing groupthink is crucial as it can result in suboptimal decision-making over time. When conflicts arise among group members, they may prioritize restoring harmony over making the best decisions. To address this issue, there are various strategies available. One approach involves encouraging each member to critically evaluate ideas and identify potential problems within the group. Additionally, accepting constructive criticism from the leader can help avoid conformity and encourage independent thinking.

Another strategy for avoiding groupthink is to divide larger groups into smaller ones led by different leaders who work on the same problem simultaneously. This fosters diversity of thought and generates a wider range of creative solutions that can be applied to tackle organizational issues effectively.

This will aid in reducing the pressure to reach agreements, as groups tend to be more comfortable working in smaller, similar groups when voicing disagreements (Kowert, 2002). Thoroughly examining effective alternatives is another method to combat groupthink, aiding in informed decision-making. Additionally, it is crucial for each member to share and discuss group ideas with individuals outside the organization to attain diverse opinions, thus benefiting the organization. The inclusion of outside experts in group meetings facilitates discussion and questioning of important issues (Kowert, 2002). Incorporating different individuals for each meeting can also be effective in minimizing group cohesion.

Various techniques including nominal group technique, Delphi technique, and Ringi technique allow group members to contribute solutions to problems as individuals instead of as a group. Although these methods can consume a lot of time, they

are essential for the decision making process. Improper use of these methods could lead to group leader manipulation of members (Kowert, 2002). To achieve goals, group members can offer dissenting opinions, reinforce other dissenting comments, rebut mind guards who rebuke dissidents, highlight past failures to remind members, draw attention to future risks, supply counter information, and request formal votes (Kowert, 2002). In more complex conflicts, the use of "hardball" techniques with various tactics may be necessary.

One way of challenging a group leader is by questioning their judgment, integrity, or intentions. However, this could expose the leader and lead to questioning their leadership. Another option is for members to publicly withdraw from the group or negotiate a situation. Withdrawal is often a shock to the organization and its public nature can have an impact. It is important for group leaders to define extreme alternatives within the group, as this will help to move towards the dissenter's position and facilitate their re-entry into the decision-making process. Ultimately, organizations must strive for good decisions to improve performance. Awareness of groupthink is crucial in avoiding it, as it has important roles in social centers such as effective communication, decision formulation, and skill generation that are useful for decision-making processes.