Every organisation has a decision-making process that ultimately determines its chances of success or failure. Strategic and operational failures become almost inevitable when decision-making is tainted with what organisational psychologists call groupthink and echo chambers.
Few organisations today have a governance structure that depends on decisions being taken by one charismatic leader. Board of directors in business, the cabinet in government, executive committees in political parties and managing boards in other organisations are expected to discuss issues that must be decided upon openly. Collectively, responsibility is assumed once a decision has been made.
The reality I have frequently faced for decades is that despite decision-sharing processes, many organisations suffer from groupthink. Most leaders like creating echo chambers to support their decisions.
For clarity, I adopt the definition of groupthink coined by the American social psychologist Irving Janis. He defines groupthink as a psychological phenomenon in which people strive for consensus within a group. In many cases, people will set aside their own personal beliefs or adopt the opinions of the rest of the group.
An echo chamber is an environment in which a person encounters beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own so that their existing views are reinforced and alternative ideas are not considered.
Some organisational leaders consider unanimity in decision-making a sign of strength. In organisations led by such leaders, people opposed to the group’s decisions or overriding opinions frequently remain quiet, preferring to keep the peace rather than disrupt the group’s uniformity. This phenomenon can be problematic.
I know of many well-intentioned and honest people who, through their tacit consent, got involved in irrational decisions in the face of duress and undue influence from a strong group in the decision-making process.
Identifying the signs of groupthink is crucial for anyone responsible for the decision-making process or overseeing an organisation’s governance, such as internal and external auditors and regulators. One of the signs of groupthink is illusions of unanimity. This happens when leaders and their close acolytes believe everyone agrees and feels the same way. It is much more difficult to speak out when everyone else in the group is on the same page.
Just eliminate professional troublemakers with a toxic agenda found in most organisations, even at the board level. But never discourage dissent or challenges to the prevailing opinion
Self-censorship causes people who might have doubts to hide their fears or misgivings. People remain quiet rather than sharing what they know, and assume that the group must know better. This attitude is frequently the result of direct pressure by a leading group within an organisation on members who pose questions or challenge the group by labelling them as disloyal or traitorous. It is easy for victims of latent bullying to ignore warning signs and rationalise their tacit consent to decisions they disagree with or consider as dangerous for their organisation.
Too often, leaders harbour the illusion that their organisational status gives them invulnerability. They are overly optimistic and engage in risk-taking. When one or a minority voices an alternative option, members supporting the leader ignore or even demonise dissenting members who may oppose or challenge the leader’s ideas.
When organisational leaders lock themselves in an echo chamber, those members who value intellectual independence frequently succumb to groupthink as they fear their objections might disrupt the group’s harmony or suspect their ideas might cause other members to reject them. The fear of being ostracised by colleagues or bosses is an endemic risk, especially in public organisations. It certainly does no good to one’s career prospects.
Financial sector regulators, for instance, are laser-focused on any indication that a financial organisation may have a charismatic leader dismantling the checks and balances crucial for good governance.
Groupthink is more likely to occur when a powerful and charismatic leader commands the group. People are more likely to follow authoritarian leaders because they fear punishment. Transformational leaders can sometimes produce the same effect when group members are willing to buy into their vision unconditionally.
The risks of groupthink and echo chamber practices must not be underestimated. They are often at the root of governance failure, especially in the public sector. The suppression of individual opinions and creative thought can lead to inefficient problem-solving. It also frequently contributes to group members’ self-censorship. This tendency to seek consensus above all else also means that group members may not adequately assess a decision’s potential risks and benefits.
Organisational leaders must encourage group members to remain critical. Just eliminate professional troublemakers with a toxic agenda found in most organisations, even at the board level. But never discourage dissent or challenges to the prevailing opinion.