Group Think: The Value of a Black Sheep
In previous papers, the origin and some consequences of cooperation, and the different conditions in which cooperation arises were presented. In this paper, we will dig into a phenomenon linked to our natural desire to reach a consensus. I will introduce the danger of conformity that can arise from group pressure, a situation when an individual agrees with a group of people even when he knows that they are wrong,
This phenomenon was tested in the Asch experiment of conformity. Individuals were sat in a room with a group of people and were told to say out loud if the line on the left was equivalent to line 1, 2 or 3.
The lines were displayed on large boards near the participants so there could be no doubt or confusion as to which was the right answer. During the test, the group (a set of actors) would pick the wrong line unanimously round after round, and so the peer pressure mounted for the experimentee.
After a few rounds, up to 60% of the participants would succumb to the pressure and select the same line as the rest of the group, knowing that it was the wrong answer.
The dangers of this effect are two factors that feed one another in a cycle. First, the organization can fall into what’s called “group think,” a phenomenon that results in irrational and poor quality decisions, as a consequence of our desire for consensus and harmony within the group.
Secondly, the individual that knows that he does not agree but that has succumbed to peer pressure becomes more and more stressed and frustrated, which finally result in him leaving the group, and leaving behind a team that is even more homogeneous and prone to group think.
The good news is that during the Asch tests, conformity falls to 25% if the group is not fully unanimous. This means that as long as one member in the group thinks differently and speaks up, the peer pressure is reduced dramatically and different opinions do arise.
How likely is this to happen in my environment? #
Apparently, it varies among different cultures. A meta-analysis done on this topic by R. Bond and P. Smith showed a strong link to the culture of the population. Conformity was particularly high in countries with more collectivist cultures and lower in individualistic countries. This brings us back to the question of the desirability of having a very cooperative culture in our corporations.
If conformity is viewed negatively, and disagreeing with one’s group is not regarded as selfish, disruptive or too aggressive, then chances are this is not a problem. However, in highly cooperative and collectivist corporations, conformity can easily arise.
If this is the case in your corporation, the following might help encourage a constructive discussion:
Make sure you have at least one person in your team with a different point of view. Explain him the risk of group think, and encourage him to give his opinion even when the whole group believes the opposite.
Try bringing into your working group or project somebody that’s not from your department. He may have a different point of view and won’t feel as much pressure from the hierarchy present in the meeting.
If you run a round table to take a decision or to share everybody’s point of view, have the team members that are prone to think differently speak first. This way they won’t suffer from the peer pressure of listening to a unanimous group before sharing their point of view.
Finally, question the unanimous opinion towards the beginning of the discussion. This will open the door to other colleagues to think differently and share their opinion.
Author: C. Criado-Perez #
References #
- Bond R & Smith P.B., Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Aschs line judgement task
- C. Criado-Perez, Is Cooperation Desirable?
- E. Dib, Cooperation in the Workplace
- Image from http://www.theinnovationdiaries.com