Free AI web copilot to create summaries, insights and extended knowledge, download it at here

Abstract

l reasoning or evaluation of the consequences or alternatives. It often arises out of a common desire not to upset the balance of a group of people.</p><p id="ad3e">A group afflicted with groupthink is more concerned about maintaining the unity of the group than with making the best decision. Whenever this happens, independent thinking of group members is frustrated or subtly disallowed. The management or leaders of the group override alternate suggestions in their bid to attain concurrence.</p><p id="f4d7">There are several <b>causes of groupthink</b>.</p><ul><li>Illusion about group’s superiority, invulnerability or higher morality.</li><li>Desire for group cohesiveness and isolation.</li><li>Rigid top-down group leadership structures.</li><li>Inflexible top down decision-making process and its associated stress.</li><li>High levels of in-group cohesion that stifles dissent and independent thinking.</li><li>Self appointed <a href="https://www.sesp.northwestern.edu/masters-learning-and-organizational-change/knowledge-lens/stories/2012/groupthink-the-role-of-leadership-in-enhancing-and-mitigating-the-pitfall-in-team-decision-making.html">“mind guards”</a> that pressurize dissenters to conform to group expectations.</li><li>People engaging in compulsive self censorship so they don’t contradict the group.</li><li>The group is more concerned about unity and unable to think out of the box for what may destroy the group or hinder its ethos on the long run.</li></ul><figure id="0048"><img src="https://cdn-images-1.readmedium.com/v2/resize:fit:800/1*FK1uz8ifqF9znsc9W6JcPg.jpeg"><figcaption>Photo by <a href="https://unsplash.com/@sammieeev?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText">Sammie Vasquez</a> on <a href="https://unsplash.com/s/photos/group?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText">Unsplash</a></figcaption></figure><h2 id="1e1b">Wrong Answers Resulting From Wrong Questions</h2><p id="f484">The consequences of predigested thinking are like the pitfalls of groupthink.</p><ul><li>Because of group and leadership dynamics, subordinates may resort to asking only those questions that the upper management wants to hear. The negative fallout is that the overlying causes of problems facing the team, department or organization are swept under the carpet.</li><li>Predigested thinking and its kin, groupthink can afflict an organization that is top heavy. This is so in organizations where there is high power distance index (<i>a la</i> Malcolm Gladwell) in management’s relation with their subordinates.</li></ul><p id="c5f9">Groupthink happens when groups strive for extreme consensus at the cost of effective decision making. They are more concerned with maintaining the unity of the group than with making the best decision. In such cases, independent thinking of group members are frowned upon and alternate suggestions are overridden in a bid to attain illusive unanimity.</p><h2 id="972e">Consequences of Predigested Answers and Solutions</h2><ul><li>One of the grievous maladies of predigested thinking is that management may give subordinates the chance to speak up, for instance, at pre-job or departmental meetings. But subordinates who dare voice ideas or opinions contrary to top management positions do so at the risk of becoming marked men. They often get punished or demoted in subtle ways afterwards.</li><li>Given the above atmosphere, subordinates quickly “<i>wizen-up</i>”, keeping mute ever after. For many of them, it will be safer to maintain the status quo rather than rock the boat and get castaway into an ocean of the unemployed.</li><li>The above scenario lead to a state where only “safe” and familiar (but wrong) questions get asked. Only safe (but long-term destructive) answers get given as feedback. In the long run, the orga

Options

nizational performance goes down the drain and everybody suffers.</li><li>When groupthink strikes, risks are minimized, and this often leads to disastrous failures.</li><li>When groupthink strikes whimperings may persist for a while and then everybody begins to maintain a code of silence that ends up detrimental to all concerned.</li></ul><h2 id="374f">The Way Out</h2><ul><li>Use of devil’s Advocate.</li><li>Promote authentic constructive dissent.</li><li>Call in the experts.</li><li>Encourage in-group diversity.</li><li>Explore opposing alternatives in smaller groups.</li><li>Leaders must not impose their personal opinions on the group.</li><li>Create time for all interest groups to speak up.</li><li>Enable people and parties directly and indirectly affected to come with their views.</li></ul><h2 id="3f5b">Key takeaways</h2><ul><li>Predigested questions occur in scenarios where only <i>“the usual culprit” </i>questions get asked. Such questions can only receive predigested, worn-out and ineffective answers.</li><li>When groupthink strikes, an organization cannot chart viable courses out of their longstanding challenges.</li><li>By dispelling predigested questions and answers, organization will better equip their teams and leaders to overcome groupthink, get to the root of seemingly intractable issues, and chart successful courses out of long standing challenges.</li></ul><h2 id="27e5">Sources</h2><ul><li>Copyright by © Robert H. Thouless, <i>Straight and Crooked Thinking</i>, Pan Books Ltd., 1953</li><li>Copyright by © Sunstein Cass R and Reid Hastie, <i>Getting Beyond Groupthink to Make Groups Smarter</i>, Harvard Business School Publishing, 2015</li><li>Copyright by © Malcolm Gladwell, <i>Outliers — The Story of Success</i>, Hachette Book Group Inc., 2008</li></ul><div id="c8f6" class="link-block"> <a href="https://readmedium.com/heres-how-the-virtuous-can-win-against-the-vile-3ce7c6fc8521"> <div> <div> <h2>Here’s How the Virtuous Can Win Against the Vile</h2> <div><h3>Pavan Chaudary’s wisdom for winning and thriving in life’s battles</h3></div> <div><p>medium.com</p></div> </div> <div> <div style="background-image: url(https://miro.readmedium.com/v2/resize:fit:320/1*S17AlcJWdMHHKye8NmHoxw.jpeg)"></div> </div> </div> </a> </div><div id="3450" class="link-block"> <a href="https://readmedium.com/since-you-hate-evil-heres-how-to-escape-being-suckered-into-it-8d7485460071"> <div> <div> <h2>Since You Hate Evil, Here’s How to Escape Being Suckered Into It.</h2> <div><h3>Ordinary people like you and me can become willful accomplices in the perpetuation of evil. Here’s how we can escape…</h3></div> <div><p>medium.com</p></div> </div> <div> <div style="background-image: url(https://miro.readmedium.com/v2/resize:fit:320/1*KO9XkwwrA0VA1rpUMe7zCA.jpeg)"></div> </div> </div> </a> </div><div id="5c5c" class="link-block"> <a href="https://readmedium.com/the-power-of-no-and-knowing-when-to-use-it-4d995e5682c4"> <div> <div> <h2>The Power of “No” and Knowing When to Use It</h2> <div><h3>These 5 lessons from Jana Kemp will help you know when to give in and when to hold your ground.</h3></div> <div><p>medium.com</p></div> </div> <div> <div style="background-image: url(https://miro.readmedium.com/v2/resize:fit:320/1*5FuSoZB8z-fAYdSMATCg3A.jpeg)"></div> </div> </div> </a> </div></article></body>

Overcoming the Booby Traps of Predigested Questions

And how to stop groupthink from destroying your team

All animals have to digest their food before they can gain energy and needed nutrients from what they ate. Carnivores feed on other animals. Their saliva does not have the enzyme ptyalin and they cannot predigest starches. Vegetarians have enzymes that contain ptyalin that they use for the predigestion of starches. These latter group of animals cannot digest meat.

Luckily, humans fall in between these two groups. As omnivores, we can digest both flesh and vegetables. The food industry predigest some food with enzymes to aid digestion in the body.

Similar to predigestion of food in the food industry, humans are prone to giving predigested answers to predigested questions arising from predigested thinking.

While the predigestion of food is a must for the sustenance of life in humans and in all animals, predigested thinking lead to predigested questions that lead to predigested answers. All three often proceed cyclically. In individuals, teams and organizations, this combination is a recipe for disaster.

According to Professor Robert Thouless “Most true statements about complicated matters of fact cannot be adequately expressed in a few words”. As humans, we all have the tendency to reduce complex matters of fact into easily digested statements or quips of few words. We call this predigested thinking.

Where predigested thinking prevails, people reduce all issues to pre-defined and familiar appellations of acceptable and often already known answers. Tragedy invariably occurs because such questions and the answers given to them are wrong.

An example of predigested thinking is the statement, “An egg a day keeps sickness at bay.” Sing this mantra enough and nobody will border to know or ask for empirical evidence at the back of this assertion.

Today, many people succumb to the extreme predigested thinking that “Religion is at the root of most modern-day evils.” Using this generalized but hole-filled blanket, they label all religions as evil. Their unstated goal then becomes banishing all forms of religious expression from the public space.

Predigested Thinking and Groupthink

Similar to predigested thinking is groupthink. Groupthink occurs when a group of individuals reaches a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation of the consequences or alternatives. It often arises out of a common desire not to upset the balance of a group of people.

A group afflicted with groupthink is more concerned about maintaining the unity of the group than with making the best decision. Whenever this happens, independent thinking of group members is frustrated or subtly disallowed. The management or leaders of the group override alternate suggestions in their bid to attain concurrence.

There are several causes of groupthink.

Illusion about group’s superiority, invulnerability or higher morality.
Desire for group cohesiveness and isolation.
Rigid top-down group leadership structures.
Inflexible top down decision-making process and its associated stress.
High levels of in-group cohesion that stifles dissent and independent thinking.
Self appointed “mind guards” that pressurize dissenters to conform to group expectations.
People engaging in compulsive self censorship so they don’t contradict the group.
The group is more concerned about unity and unable to think out of the box for what may destroy the group or hinder its ethos on the long run.

Wrong Answers Resulting From Wrong Questions

The consequences of predigested thinking are like the pitfalls of groupthink.

Because of group and leadership dynamics, subordinates may resort to asking only those questions that the upper management wants to hear. The negative fallout is that the overlying causes of problems facing the team, department or organization are swept under the carpet.
Predigested thinking and its kin, groupthink can afflict an organization that is top heavy. This is so in organizations where there is high power distance index (a la Malcolm Gladwell) in management’s relation with their subordinates.

Groupthink happens when groups strive for extreme consensus at the cost of effective decision making. They are more concerned with maintaining the unity of the group than with making the best decision. In such cases, independent thinking of group members are frowned upon and alternate suggestions are overridden in a bid to attain illusive unanimity.

Consequences of Predigested Answers and Solutions

One of the grievous maladies of predigested thinking is that management may give subordinates the chance to speak up, for instance, at pre-job or departmental meetings. But subordinates who dare voice ideas or opinions contrary to top management positions do so at the risk of becoming marked men. They often get punished or demoted in subtle ways afterwards.
Given the above atmosphere, subordinates quickly “wizen-up”, keeping mute ever after. For many of them, it will be safer to maintain the status quo rather than rock the boat and get castaway into an ocean of the unemployed.
The above scenario lead to a state where only “safe” and familiar (but wrong) questions get asked. Only safe (but long-term destructive) answers get given as feedback. In the long run, the organizational performance goes down the drain and everybody suffers.
When groupthink strikes, risks are minimized, and this often leads to disastrous failures.
When groupthink strikes whimperings may persist for a while and then everybody begins to maintain a code of silence that ends up detrimental to all concerned.

The Way Out

Use of devil’s Advocate.
Promote authentic constructive dissent.
Call in the experts.
Encourage in-group diversity.
Explore opposing alternatives in smaller groups.
Leaders must not impose their personal opinions on the group.
Create time for all interest groups to speak up.
Enable people and parties directly and indirectly affected to come with their views.

Key takeaways

Predigested questions occur in scenarios where only “the usual culprit” questions get asked. Such questions can only receive predigested, worn-out and ineffective answers.
When groupthink strikes, an organization cannot chart viable courses out of their longstanding challenges.
By dispelling predigested questions and answers, organization will better equip their teams and leaders to overcome groupthink, get to the root of seemingly intractable issues, and chart successful courses out of long standing challenges.

Sources

Copyright by © Sunstein Cass R and Reid Hastie, Getting Beyond Groupthink to Make Groups Smarter, Harvard Business School Publishing, 2015

Here’s How the Virtuous Can Win Against the Vile

Pavan Chaudary’s wisdom for winning and thriving in life’s battles

medium.com

Since You Hate Evil, Here’s How to Escape Being Suckered Into It.

Ordinary people like you and me can become willful accomplices in the perpetuation of evil. Here’s how we can escape…

medium.com

The Power of “No” and Knowing When to Use It

These 5 lessons from Jana Kemp will help you know when to give in and when to hold your ground.

medium.com