GRoup think on SMall Group about how the class elaborates how people Essay

conference think on SMall Group about how the class elaborates how people go with the convocation - study ExampleStudies have proved that despite assemblages decision on certain matters, individuals of the similar mathematical group may have different opinions of their own. However, the group exerts certain amount of force on members to prevent unanimity, for which they might sacrifice individualised opinions. Internal and external reasons force members to go with the group regardless of personal perspectives. Symptoms of groupthink In order to understand the factors causing groupthink, one should identify the symptoms of this threat. According to Freeman (1999), a group that is vulnerable to groupthink is less likely to seek alternatives in its decision making processes moreover, it will heed minuscular attention to distinctive ideas or external assistance (p. 249). This attitude is termed as the illusion of infallibility due to which the group rebuffs the advice of experts and tends to flaw. Another reason that determines the intensity of groupthink is the coat of the organization. According to experts, large groups are more likely to bring forward groupthink. To illustrate, in a comparatively bigger group, individuals are normally reluctant to take up initiatives instead, they would gather the common decision of the group. Fear is the root cause of this unanimity and to avert flaws, members hide their personal views bit they are in big groups. In contrast, a groups unusually small size also smoke be light a reason for groupthink. Minority groups often tend to maintain socially unfavorable levels of cohesiveness. In order to vie with the majority segments, many minority groups choose subversive activities. We can see such stereotypical ideologies that intensify domestic as well as international tensions crossways the globe. Political parties, ethnic groups, and even governmental bodies also can be affected by groupthink. As discussed earlier, the exceeding emphasis on unanimity compels individuals to sacrifice their personal opinions often regardless of their relevance to the context. The famine of multiple responses normally leads to immediate decisions presumably in favor of the group leadership. This really reminds us the conditional relation of invoking personal perspectives during the process of decision making in groups. Furthermore, members overdependence is another notable symptom of groupthink. Most of the groups are basically vulnerable to this threat as members maintain higher degree of expectation on leadership. They curse on leaders quality and skills and anticipate higher level of achievement from him. Once they come to realize the inability or limitation of the leadership, they would attribute group failure to the leadership. Strategic approach to groupthink Although moderne organizations pay higher emphasis on teamwork and organizational cohesion as their competitive advantage, they are inevitable to heed genuine effort to the formulation of strategies to meet the challenges of groupthink. The following part will discuss virtually of the popular strategies that HR managers often apply in their groups to address groupthink. As Thompson (2006), purports, managers can invite change perspectives into the decision making process because according to the author, the paucity of varying opinion was the cause of many governmental and organizational failures (p.177). Hence, as the group environment becomes more viable, members will get more opportunity to interact with experts which in turn will positively influence the decision making. The logic is that the more a group is exposed to external