Agenda

1. Agenda • Handbook update • Test? • Due date for Handbook • Social Influence: conformity, norms, groupthink • Team time for Handbook • Next week: Team and member performance assessment– Each team brings a proposal and instrument for assessment

2. Social Influence: Cohesion, norms & groupthink

3. Team cohesion, norms & groupthink • What is cohesion and why is it important? • How might you develop cohesion in a group? • What are the downsides to cohesion? • What is the relationship of cohesion to norms? • What are norms? • Where do norms come from? • What are the advantages and disadvantages of norms? • What is groupthink and its symptoms? • What is the effect of GT on a team’s performance? • Team consultation task to decrease GT

4. The Advantages of High Team Cohesion • High esprit! • Strong effort • Unified vision • Action oriented • High goal setting • Rapid decision making • Team commitment and loyalty • Member support & encouragement

5. Solomon Asch Line Experiment: How group pressure affects individual opinion on a task Eight male students were arranged around a table as shown by the circles in the image below. Only one of them however was a real participant (shown in blue) the others were confederates of the researchers. The task was to identify which of the lines (A, B or C) was the same length as the test line (X). They answered out loud in turn and the confederates were all told to answer the same incorrect letter. The real participant was placed in his position because it would give him a chance to see what the other participants answers were, but not right at the end as he may become suspicious. the (genuine) participants conformed on 32% of the trials and only 26% of people never conformed.

6. Sherif (1935) Autokinetic Effect

7. Bean counters unite!– Jesness study of conformity around an ambiguous task Participants guessed at the number of beans in the jar before joining groups and comparing estimations.  Jenness found that participants guess at the answer, but when put into groups their answers start to converge around a similar estimate as individuals look to others for help. Unsure of the answer they look to others for guidance and support

8. Zimbardo’s 1973 “prison” experiment (shades of Abu G’raib?) 24 volunteer college students at Stanford University were divided into “prisoner” and “guard” groups. Over several days the guards became more humiliating and abusive and prisoners became more rebellious, eventually reaching dangerous stress proportions. The experiment was discontinued when the effect were finally noted.

9. Team Stages of Development 3 2 4 1 Overview of GroupThink Leadership Promotion of Team Cohesion Advantages of Cohesion Team Pressure to Perform Flawed Organizational Structures Symptoms of GroupThink Consequences of GroupThink Counter measures

11. GroupThink Profile Scales Team Cohesion: The level of commitment, loyalty, and team spirit experienced by team members Pressure: Organizational culture and situational conditions that create stress and performance pressure on the team Flawed Organizational Structures: A lacking of organizational and team procedures and controls by which team processes and outcomes are monitored Group Think: Eight symptoms of decreased decision making effectiveness Counter-measures: Internal and external procedures to monitor team processes and decisions in order to reduce the risk of groupthink and promote effective decision atmosphere

12. When it hits the fan: Consequences of GroupThink--faulty decisions 1. Fail to adequately determine their objectives and alternatives 2. Fail to adequately assess the risks associated with group decisions 3. Fail to cycle through discarded alternatives to reexamine their worth after a majority of the group discarded the alternative 4. Not seek expert advice 5. Select and use only information that supports their position and conclusions 6. Does not make contingency plans in case their decision and resulting actions fail

13. +3sd +2sd +1sd Mean -1sd -2sd -3sd GroupThink Profile for CSS-IT Flawed Organiz. Structures Group Think Symptoms Counter measures Team Pressure Cohesion 130 49 87 90 120 112 42 76 78 103 94 35 65 66 86 O O O 76 28 54 54 69 O O 52 58 16 43 42 40 11 32 30 35 22 4 21 18 18 52 81 89 30 52

14. Reducing or Preventing Groupthink • Use scientific method--gather data, understand and • explore before conclusions • Brainstorm before discussing course of action • People in power positions (leaders) should refrain from early opinions • Invite outside experts--seek information that does not support preferred • course • Develop criteria for evaluating options against • Assess risks, revenge effects, and regret analysis • After initial solution, develop second solution • Make contingency plans • Devil’s advocate--Encourage members to raise objections & concerns • (challenge norms) • Multiple Advocacy--subgroups make different proposals • Have group be evaluated by persons separate from the leader • Second chance decisions • Have group members get feedback from constituents on tentative • decision • Develop multiple scenarios and contingencies for each scenario • Nominal group technique and Delphi method • Foster diversity in group membership

15. Team Task (30”): Consultation to a team at risk for GT • Your team has been asked to consult with a high power executive team that a board of directors is concerns may be at risk for groupthink • You are to generate and prioritize a list of suggestions to reduce the risk • Consider interventions at all stages (e.g., reduce cohesion and other contributing factors as well as countermeasures) • Be prepared to explain how they would work