Respond To The Discussion Question By The Due Date

By The Due Date Assigned Respond To The Discussion Question Submit Y

By the due date assigned, respond to the discussion question. Submit your responses to the appropriate Discussion Area. Use the same Discussion Area to comment on your classmates' submissions by the due date assigned, and continue the discussion through the end of the module. According to Irving Janis (1972), groupthink is the process by which we conform to others' decisions even when we individually disagree with these decisions. Imagine that Fred is the manager of a bookstore, and the sales of books have slowed in recent months. Fred decides to meet with his employees to find ways to reduce expenses and increase sales. To reduce the possibility of groupthink before the start of the meeting, Fred encourages everyone to speak up with their opinions—no matter what those opinions are. Discuss why groupthink takes place. What characteristics of a group most often lead to groupthink? Do you agree with Fred's strategy to reduce the likelihood that groupthink will occur? Which other strategies can Fred employ to reduce the likelihood of groupthink during the meeting?

Paper For Above instruction

Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a cohesive group when the desire for harmony and conformity results in irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcomes. It is often characterized by the suppression of dissent, illusion of unanimity, and the belief that the group's decisions are infallible. Groupthink typically arises in groups where cohesion is highly valued, members feel pressured to conform, or where leadership influences dominate the decision-making process. Several characteristics of a group can lead to groupthink, including a high level of stress, insulation from outside opinions, a directive leadership style, and a lack of systematic procedures for critical evaluation.

One of the key factors contributing to groupthink is group cohesion. When members strongly identify with the group and its objectives, there is a tendency to prioritize consensus over critical analysis. Another characteristic is the presence of a directive leader who expresses strong opinions early in the decision process, unintentionally discouraging alternative viewpoints. Additionally, insulation from outside opinions prevents critical external input that could challenge prevailing assumptions, fostering an environment where dissenting voices are silenced or ignored.

In the context of Fred’s situation as a bookstore manager facing declining sales, his strategy to encourage all employees to voice their opinions before the meeting is an effective step to mitigate groupthink. By fostering an environment where dissenting opinions are welcomed, Fred aims to counteract the natural tendency of group members to conform to a dominant perspective, thereby promoting diverse viewpoints and critical thinking. Such an approach helps in identifying potential flaws or alternative solutions that could be overlooked in a more cohesive yet uncritical environment.

However, while Fred's strategy is beneficial, it might not be sufficient on its own to prevent groupthink entirely. Additional measures can further strengthen resistance to groupthink. For instance, Fred can assign a "devil's advocate" in the meeting, where a team member intentionally questions proposals or offers counterarguments to stimulate critical analysis. Encouraging anonymous input through written suggestions can also reduce peer pressure and fear of rejection. Implementing structured decision-making techniques, such as the nominal group technique or the Delphi method, can facilitate independent thinking and reduce conformity pressures.

Furthermore, promoting an open climate that values diversity in perspectives and critical debate contributes significantly to avoiding groupthink. Leaders should also explicitly encourage group members to critically evaluate ideas and seek external opinions when appropriate. Regularly encouraging team members to dissent or challenge ideas without fear of repercussion creates an environment where critical discussion is normalized, and collective decision-making becomes more robust.

In conclusion, groupthink arises from a combination of desire for harmony, cohesion, directive leadership, and insularity, which can lead groups to poor or irrational decisions. Fred's proactive approach to invite open opinions is a positive step, but employing additional strategies such as appointing a devil's advocate, using anonymous input, and fostering an environment of critical thinking further diminishes the likelihood of groupthink. Effective leadership that emphasizes diverse viewpoints and critical analysis can significantly enhance decision quality, especially in situations like declining sales where innovative solutions are necessary.

References

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Houghton Mifflin.

Esser, J. K. (1998). Alive and well after 25 years: A review of groupthink research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73(2-3), 116-141.

Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction and the emergence of vital psychological states. Motivation and Emotion, 28(2), 83-101.

Nemeth, C. J. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93(1), 23-32.

Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628.

McCauley, C., & Drath, W. (1984). How organizations develop leaders. Training & Development Journal, 38(3), 76-83.

Seifert, C. F., Caicedo, N. M., & Hantula, D. A. (2004). Groupthink, dissent, and conformity: Some empirical findings. Group Decision and Negotiation, 13(4), 353-373.

West, M. A. (1996). It’s time to consider the human side of management research: The example of groupthink. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(4), 431-436.

Hirokawa, R. Y., & Gouran, D. S. (1984). The functional perspective on small group decision making. Communication Monographs, 51(2), 128-148.

|