Organizational Behavior (BUSI 3312)
The Dangers of Groupthink - Case study
By:
Noor AlShaikh 200900712
Bayan AlNezir 200900934
Alia Mohammd 200700597
Amirah Al-Otaibi 201001687
Mashail Al Hussan 200800211
Instructor: Ms. Kumarashvari Subramaniam (Ashvari)
October 26, 2011
(Fall 2011)
Executive Summary
The term groupthink refers to the tendency of certain cohesive groups to get out of touch
with reality and results in faulty decision-making (Wikipedia). This paper attempts to discuss
some of the dangers of groupthink and how they may affect the success of the group. Some of
the factors that contribute to groupthink are mainly the need to maintain group harmony. On the
other hand teams can reduce this phenomena by avoiding judgments of others ideas. Through
this case study we will also show that the differences in status and personalities can affect how
your opinion is heard within a group, as lower status members have less power in a group than
high status members. We find that size and cohesiveness of a group may also have significance
in groupthink as it is more likely as the size of the group increases and as the group members are
more cohesive and friendly and do not want to leave the group groupthink will appear. Finally,
this study indicates that groupthink is an important issue that is very common among groups and
one that should be addressed when it occurs.
Table of Content:
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………3
The Factors that lead to Group think…………………………………………………..4
What can teams do to reduce Groupthink from occurring……………………………..5
How Differences in status of group members contribute to groupthink ……………...6
How do group norms contribute to groupthink………………………………………..7
How might group characteristics “size and cohesiveness” affect groupthink………...8
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….9
References……………………………………………………………………………10
Introduction:
In management, we have always been told that working in well-managed groups can
excel in an organizations performance and produces better outcomes (2 + 2 ≥ 4). Although
through experience we find that is not always true, there are certain dilemmas and obstacles in
working within a group, one of which is groupthink. The term “Groupthink” was developed by
Irving L. Janis in 1972. He found that cohesive groups developed “us” versus “them” attitude
which affected their ability to make precise decisions. Groupthink basically prevents individual
thought (Janis, 1982, p.9). Through this case study “The Dangers of Group think” we have
found that there is a great danger of failure of groups and businesses from trying to maintain
group harmony and therefore create “Groupthink”. We see in many situations people may crossover their own beliefs and thoughts just to avoid disrupting a group’s coordination such as in the
case of “Infinity Capital”. Throughout this paper we will be conducting an analysis of this case
study and we will then answer some questions about the effect of “Groupthink” on the success of
an organization. We will concentrate on some of the factors that may lead to groupthink, how the
different statuses of group members effect groupthink, how do norms contribute, and finally the
effect of size and cohesiveness on groupthink.
Q#1: The factors that lead to group think in the case:
One important cause of groupthink is the desire to maintain group harmony and trying to
minimize the conflict between the individual in the group and others around, the matter of the
problem is not necessarily from the decision maker, sometimes this happens because members
try to say their opinion but no one would listen, so they lose motivation for speaking up. In the
Groupthink Model below is a clear description of the factors and the consequences of
groupthink.
What can teams do to attempt to reduce groupthink from occurring?
There are several ways to avoid or reduce group thinking. The leader should motivate the
critical evaluator to each member. Also the leader should avoid stating preferences and
expectations at the beginning, so the member would feel more comfortable with giving his/her
opinions. In addition, bringing experts to meetings should encourage the members to challenge
views. A leader should ask the members for their opinions and advices, and he/she also could do
surveys to evaluate the decisions.
Q #2: How might differences in status among group members contribute to group
thinking? For example how might lower-status members react to a group's decision? Are
lower-status member more or less likely to be dissenters? Why may might higher-status
group member be more effective dissenters?
The differences in status among group member contribute to groupthink greatly because
usually a higher status is more dominant than the lower status person. In the discussions and
contributions of group members we can see the variation between their personalities. Differing
personalities have a role in the reflection of individual interaction in the group. For example,
people who express their opinions with confidence and freedom and courage of those who
disagree hesitate to give their opinion.
Lower status members are not likely to be dissenters, lower-status members would feel
like they have less power, therefore they may be less likely to speak up or give their opinions.
High-status members have a higher self-esteem and this may cause them to be more opinionated
and more effective dissenters. So, they probably hold more power.
Q #3: How do group norms contribute to Group Think?
A group’s norms can contribute to groupthink or prevent it, depending on the culture of
the team. If the group members are unreceptive and passive this may lead to groupthink, because
no one is willing to give their opinion in fear of conflict and being attacked by other group
members who might disagree. According to (Groupthink, n.d ) another group norm that can lead
to groupthink is when a group overestimate their power and goodness, meaning when the group
look at themselves with very high morality and decency by thinking they are the best group out
there, they start thinking that they are invincible. This feeling of perfection may lead to
“correlative close mindedness”. When this happens a group will not want to listen to any
intruding advice or warnings, and as they are under the pressure for uniformity group members
will reside to the side if they have any questions or suggestions. In addition, fear of the leader
can lead to such a problem. If an employee feels like he/she is threatened if they spoke up or
might be in exposure of losing their job they will of course avoid speaking their mind.
However, if the group norms were those of which advocate speaking up and being assertive then
this could guard against groupthink. This can be achieved through several methods. According to
(Groupthink, n.d ) having good meeting procedures can ease group pressure. When a meeting is
held with procedures encouraging ideas, suggestions and questions this will lead to making the
group members more assertive by giving them the confidence to speak their mind with no
grudges or hatred from other group members. A group leader can also play a great role in
decreasing groupthink. A leader can promote for norms of disagreement and develop them by
being less intimidating to other members in his/her group. Being a democratic leader and being
open minded, by listening to all group members will reduce groupthink.
As a manager in any company they must understand the dangers of groupthink and try to find
ways to avoid that issue. As we said previously, a manager can avoid groupthink by being more
open minded and less intimidating to his employees. Installing good meeting procedures can be a
vital element also. A manager should also give small rewards and incentives for people who
bring new ideas and alternative solutions to the table. Many other methods can be found and
developed as well; however the key point here is that good managers should be able to give their
employees the impression that speaking up, and saying what is on your mind is a positive thing
and there are great rewards for it. A good manager must also show the group the dangers and
disadvantages of groupthink. This way the manager will form group norms that fight groupthink.
Q #4: How might group characteristics such as size and cohesiveness affect groupthink?
Group characteristics are the things that shape out the face of the groupthink issue. Size is
one factor that affects groupthink, but before that let us agree that a group cannot be formed out
of one or two it is three or more people that make a group. In other words, there are no minimum
or maximum group members, but according to Hutter (2005) "perhaps groupthink becomes more
likely as the size of a group increases from three to some unknown size, beyond which it
becomes less likely to occur as the size continues to increase. But it could be that the tendency
for groupthink to occur may decrease as the size of the group increases" (p. 5).
The second factor of groupthink is group cohesiveness, and as Hutter (2005) found that
"cohesive groups, are groups whose members like each other and, perhaps more importantly, like
being members of the group—so they do not want to leave, be forced out, or be ignored by other
members. They are likely to operate in the group in a manner that seeks the approval and even
affection of the other group members"(p. 5).
In this case, that means that everyone of the group is actually being an inactive member
by not sharing his point of view in a proper way and trying to approve the validity of their theory
or information they are offering, because members are trying to avoid arguments and
disagreements with the leaders or majorities opinion.
Groupthink occurs when a cohesive group strives for consensus in arriving at a decision.
this striving for consensus typically interferes with making a good decision. However, whenever
the group ignores or discounts information that would tend to show a particular decision to be
unwise, this means that group members are being immoral and indecent or not thinking
rationally of the consequences of their silence. Moreover, as groupthink mostly leads to failure
decisions this does not make size or cohesiveness the only responsible factors of groupthink
danger, there are other causes involved that every group member should consider.
Conclusion:
“Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is
success.” ~Henry Ford
For a group to achieve great success it is important that they maintain true to the cause
and not let their fear of rejection and disruption of group harmony stop them from achieving the
group’s ultimate goal. Many groups in organizations now suffer from groupthink, other members
are more dominant than others due to their personalities they take the lead and others only
follow. We find that there are many reasons for groupthink occurrence as norms may affect
group performance as well and group characteristics, and although it may be difficult to manage
a group without the possibility of groupthink, teams can work together to try to eliminate it.
There are many dangers of Groupthink, but together though understanding these dangers groups
can manage and overcome them.
References
Forward. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 73(2-3)
Groupthink . (n.d.). Retrieved 10 26, 2011, from Reference for Business, Encyclopedia of
Business 2D ED.: http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/small/Eq-Inc/Groupthink.html#b
http://liquidbriefing.com/twiki/pub/Dev/RefAldag1993/beyond_fiasco.pdf
http://speakingcenter.uncg.edu/resources/tipsheets/groupcommunication/groupthink.pdf
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/sam/groupthink_johnson.pdf
http://www.pols.iastate.edu/ps305/groupthink%20now%20ch01.pdf
http://www.psysr.org/about/pubs_resources/groupthink%20overview.
Janis, L.J. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Janis, L.J. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascos.
Boston:Houghton Mifflin.
McCauley, C. (1998). Group dynamics in Janis’s Theory of groupthink: Backward and