Explain how groupthink and groupshift affect group decision-making with reference to contemporary management research
Introduction
A group is defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who work together at achieve particular objectives.
Groups have always been important in organizations. The belief that a group decision is superior to an individual decision-making is generally accepted throughout most organizations. When we work together in groups we sometimes suffer illusions of righteousness and invincibility. One aspect of group decision-making that has been extensively examined has been the phenomena of groupthink. This is a by-product of so-called `cohesive groups' that results in a tendency to allow group pressures for conformity to interfere with or deter effective group decision-making. . Irving Janis offered his theory of groupthink in explanation, arguing that groupthink is "a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action."
What is groupthink?
Irving L. Janis' "Victims of Groupthink" first developed the term `groupthink'. Irving critically examined a number of political fiascos in history and found that the decisions that facilitated the disasters were a result of what he termed groupthink. Today this term is applied to many group decision making processes where there is a tendency for the group conform to a majority view without any critical appraisal of the underlying assumptions or examination of contrary points of view.
Irving Janis in his book "Victims of Group-Think" described his observations of phenomena of group leadership and member interaction characterised by inward-looking, self-regulating and stereotypical behaviours that lead to distorted decision-making. Janis defines groupthink as
"A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive group, when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action."
What is groupshift?
Groupshift--group makes more or less risky decisions than individuals. What appears to happen in groups is that the discussion leads to a significant shift in the positions of members toward a more extreme position in the direction toward which they were already leaning before the discussion. So conservative types become more cautions and the more aggressive types take on more risk. The group discussion tends to exaggerate the initial position of the group.
Explain how groupthink and groupshift affect group decision-making with reference to contemporary management research
Groupthink
Groupthink is the most severe problem in today's society. It is a serious mental disease that has not been recognized as such. It turns members of a group into believers and followers of rituals. They believe the group is right and others are wrong. It reduces communication from the group to outsiders. In serious cases of groupthink, members use force and violence to convince non-believers.
"Groupthink refers to a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment that results from in-group pressures". Groupthink can lead to bad judgments and decisions being made. It serves as a simple way to deal with difficult issues. Groupthink is a defective decision-making process that can arise when members of any group favour "consensus seeking" as in solidarity over information processing. Groupthink is more likely to arise when the group is highly cohesive and similar to the exclusion of other points of view within the group. Groupthink occurs in varying degrees and is usually unknown to the ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
"Groupthink refers to a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment that results from in-group pressures". Groupthink can lead to bad judgments and decisions being made. It serves as a simple way to deal with difficult issues. Groupthink is a defective decision-making process that can arise when members of any group favour "consensus seeking" as in solidarity over information processing. Groupthink is more likely to arise when the group is highly cohesive and similar to the exclusion of other points of view within the group. Groupthink occurs in varying degrees and is usually unknown to the members affected by it.
A group suffering form groupthink is likely to display a number of symptoms, including stereotyping the "enemy" bolstering one's own morality, developing and illusion of invulnerability, self-censorship, and the censorship o potential critics (Janis, 1982)
As groups begin to reach a high level of cohesiveness, there is a strong tendency for the members to become euphoric, to believe that the group is all-powerful and all protective. Highly risky decisions can be made without seriously considering alternatives and consequences, largely because the group has boundless confidence in its luck.
Groups experiencing groupthink use faulty strategies when they make decisions. Example case study of groupthink: special advisory committee to President John F. Kennedy that planned and implemented a covert invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. Janis believes that groups experiencing groupthink use faulty strategies when they make decisions. In Kennedy's advisory group, discussion focused on two extreme alternatives either endorse the Bay of Pigs invasion or abandon Cuba to communism while ignoring all other potential alternatives. In addition, the group lost sight of its overall objectives as it became caught up in the minor details of the invasion plan. The group also avoided any information that pointed to limitations in their plans but sought out facts and opinions that buttressed their initial preferences. The group members didn't make a few small errors; they committed dozens of blunders.
Symptoms of groupthink can be discerned among the members of the Kennedy team, an illusion of invulnerability, a collective effort to rationalise their decision, an unquestioned belief in the group's inherent morality, a stereotyped view of enemy leaders as too evil to warrant genuine attempts to negotiate, and the emergence of self-appointed mind-guards.
Symptoms of Groupthink
The undesirable aspect of the "group-think" phenomena as it affects group performance in its decision-making.
. Illusion of Vulnerability.
Members of the group develop an impression that they can do no wrong, which may happen when the group is powerful. Stereotyping Outsiders. A group exhibiting groupthink will more frequently and dangerously rely on shared stereotypes to justify their needs and positions. They may stereotype members of the group itself - they more readily stereotype rivals, enemies, other departments and even expert advisers who slow down or challenge their decision-making tasks.
2. Bounded rationality and tethered assumptions
Group tend to suffer from their own bounded rationality. Members fall under the impression that they are right - if data/evidence suggests they may be wrong. Members reassure others that their interpretation and perspective on matters is correct.
3. Belief in Inherent Morality
This is an extension to the invulnerability and righteousness symptoms. Janis feels this can occur when the group as a whole
. Feels they are doing the right thing and
2. Believe their cause to be morally underpinned. They exhibit an illusion of morality.
A group may see that
* They cooperate well with each other and/or have a powerful leader who gives energy to the group.
* The feeling is that "we are good guys and our decisions are in everyone's best interests. We are doing this to benefit everyone."
4. Self-Censorship.
In a groupthink situation, one characteristic is that members may submit themselves to self-censorship. Conformity comes into play.
A group member may raise questions and objections about the group's activities but on meeting a rebuff opposition often from the leader or the leader's supporters withdraw and not press the point home. Their attempt to open up discussion is too thin and insubstantial to make a difference to a fierce argument.
From a decision-making perspective - if you know something is wrong - it is important to say it and keep on saying it. The problem is when this becomes a nuisance to dominant others. The loner becomes excluded and stereotyped.
5. Direct Pressure on Dissenters
Sometimes a group member who questions the rightness of the goals is pressurised by others into concurring/agreeing. A group leader or prominent group member may use power
Such behaviours lead to uncritical thinking, acquiescence and conformity in decisions. The expertise that members have to offer is not used effectively.
6. Mindguards
A characteristic of group think behaviour, Janis suggests, is that a member of the group might take it upon themselves to shield the leader from dissenters/doubters. Some of the group members might have a private opinion about the goals of the group but, again, no one wants to speak up. Every person may privately disagree with what is occurring in the group, yet publicly everyone expresses total agreement with the group's policies. The planners who mounted the Bay of Pigs invasion, for example, quashed dissent, kept misgivings to themselves, and hid controversial information from the group. As a result, a "curious atmosphere of assumed consensus" characterized each session (Schlesinger, 1965, p. 250).
The most serious obstacles to effective group decision-making are diffusion of responsibility, deindividuation and pressures toward conformity. The combination of high cohesiveness, isolation form alternative opinions and facts, group norms that stifle debate and the expression of minority views, and a directive leadership style that forces conformity, produce the groupthink phenomenon. As a result the group is prone to making risky decisions.
Groupshift
In comparing group decisions with the individual decisions of members within the group, evidence suggests that there are differences. The group decisions are more conservative than the individual decision. More often, the shift is toward greater risk. Greater risk can be taken because even if the decisions fail, no one member can be held wholly responsible.
The researchers found that the subjects generally advocated riskier decisions in groups than as individuals. Moreover, this group shift carried over when they gave their private choices following the group discussion. This change was dubbed the risky shift (Wallach et al., 1962).
This occurs when the group adopts a more extreme position than the initial position of the group. Group discussion tends to exaggerate the initial position of the group. For example conservative groups become more cautious and more aggressive groups take greater risks. The most plausible explanation is that the group diffuses responsibility. This allows individuals greater freedom to take risks since no individual is wholly accountable.
The decision of the group reflects the dominant decision-making norm that develops during the group's decision. Whether the shift in the group' decision is toward greater caution or more risk depends on the dominant prediscussion norm.
Identify how these affect group productivity
According to Janis (1982, p. 9), groupthink is "a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action." To Janis, groupthink is a disease that infects healthy groups, rendering them inefficient and unproductive.
Group norms themselves can have powerful effects on a group's productivity, goals and expectations. If the members spend their time strictly on business and ignore interpersonal relationships and hidden agendas, misunderstandings can increase. In this situation, each individual does his or her job but steadfastly remains uninvolved with other members as people.
On the other hand, if members spend a great deal of their work time getting acquainted, building personal relationships, and developing increased listening skills and influence on each other, there may be high personal satisfaction, at least for some, but no time or energy invested in the task. High personal involvement may mean high morale but little effort on task activity and, consequently, low productivity.
Frequently, more cohesive groups are more productive than less cohesive groups (Norris and Niebuhr, 1980). However, increased cohesiveness does not always mean increased productivity. Increased cohesiveness means that members are able to influence on another more. If they decide to use this influence for increased productivity, they could be very effective. However, low productivity may have several related caused within a group or organization, in which case simply increasing the cohesiveness or the group will not solve the productivity problem.
Why manager needs to consider relevant research implications?
Because
From the above it can be seen that the best way to avoid Groupthink is to have an understanding and awareness of it. Groups that constantly question decisions are likely to never encounter Groupthink. Groups are useful and necessary in many situations. They often solve problems that individuals cannot. Groupthink can limit the value of groups. Identifying a set of characteristics including an illusion of invulnerability, self-censorship, and others can recognize groupthink problems. Janis recommends many strategies for avoiding Groupthink. Groups can assign the role of critical evaluator to each member, divide into subgroups, invite experts to sit in on meetings, and so on. Groupthink is a problem that can have destructive consequences. If group members are aware of Groupthink and are constantly checking for it the damaging effects of this condition can be avoided.
http://www.trans4mind.com/global/group.html
