Chapter 10 Leadership and Decision Making in Groups 287One important way to prevent groupthink is to encourage dissent among
members and manage it productively (Klocke, 2007). In fact, some of the
same practices for handling interpersonal conflict discussed in Chapter 8 can
help you deal constructively with disagreements in a group. For example,
frame conflicts as disagreements over issues or ideas, not as evidence of a weak
character or some other personal shortcoming in particular members. To illus-
trate, when someone in the group expresses a dissenting viewpoint, don’t say,
“It’s clear that you aren’t as dedicated to our cause as I had hoped.” Instead,
say something like “It looks like we have some different ideas circulating
about how to handle this new problem. Let’s list these ideas and talk about
the possible benefits and risks of each of them.” A recent study by Aakhus
and Rumsey (2010) supports this point by noting that productive conflict
can generate more supportive communication for members of an online can-
cer support community than simply expecting members to keep dissenting
opinions private.
Forces That Shape Group Decision Making
Experts have identified three forces—cognitive, psychological, and social—that
strongly affect how groups and their leaders discuss and arrive at decisions
(Hirokawa, Gouran, & Martz, 1988). All of them appear to have played some
role in the Challenger disaster.
Cognitive Forces
Cognitive forces consist of group members’ thoughts, beliefs, and emotions.
These affect how everyone in a particular group perceives, interprets, evaluates,
stores, and retrieves information, which in turn influences the group’s decisions.
NASA officials who made the fateful decision to launch the Challenger shuttle
apparently discounted the credibility of key information available to them at
the time, and they drew incorrect conclusions from the data. They also wrongly
believed that the shuttle system was sound, which made them overly confident
in their ability to have a successful launch.
Psychological Forces
Psychological forces refer to group members’ personal motives, emotions, atti-
tudes, and values. In the Challenger disaster, lower-level NASA decision makers
had initially recommended postponing the launch until the day warmed up.
But when higher-ups pressured them to reverse their recommendation, they
caved in—perhaps because they were worried about losing their jobs if they
didn’t go along.
The decision makers also changed their attitudes about which criteria to use
for postponing a shuttle launch. Previously, NASA rules dictated that a launch
wouldn’t take place if anyone doubted its safety. But with the Challenger, the rule
had changed: the launch would proceed unless someone presented conclusive
evidence that it was unsafe. Engineers hesitated to express their inconclusive
qualms, and so the launch proceeded.