Replying to LO29223 --
Dear Ellery, LO-ers,
GroupThink is not a bad idea or inferior thinking at all. It is one of
the four ways to solve problems. However, in the description i used:
It just gives an illusion of unanimity where you need consensus;
It reduces critical thinking were an open dialogue is necessary;
it puts pressure on teammembers to comply and where in the long run free
choosen commitment works better;
with Group Think the other is being stereotyped without noticing that part
of the blaming might be projection of repressed and untolerated emotions
and - last but not least -
Group Think leads people to completely ignore facts of the situation- or
worse - leads people to see only those facts that they want to see. Most
facts just express an opinion and should be treated as such.
When we need free, committed choice based on critical thinking with
consensually validated facts on how to treat other groups or nations,
GroupThink should not be the preferred methode of discussion. When one is
offered a choice between or good or bad, with or against, - tertium non
datur - in a situation of moral choice, GroupThink rules.
Keep up the good work,
Ellery July wrote:
>Group Think is less the norm then it was a few years.
>Interestingly there are so good benefits to group think: Crime is bad and
>mistreating workers will produce inferior products over time are two group
>think items which I adhere.
>The real discussion should be about how group think (at times) can improve
>your services and/or when it hinders listening and learning new ideals.
Jan Lelie <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.