According to Dweck, "the fixed mindset creates groupthink. . . . Leaders, to bolster their ego, suppress dissent. Or workers, seeking validation from leaders, fall in line behind them" (136). But " a growth mindset--by relieving people of the illusions or the burdens of fixed ability--leads to a full and open discussion of the information and to enhanced decision making" (136).
Think of groups that you have been a part of. Have you been in a group that seemed to be afflicted by groupthink? How about a group that was paralyzed by dissent and by naysayers who effectively kept the group from accomplishing anything?
What kind of group is more common?
I can think of several times in a group where one person was labeled as the "smart person" and therefore decided what the group should do and how they should do it. That person often ended up doing the majority of the work, with the other members doing small side-tasks. Sometimes, other members would have better ideas, but since they weren't the smartest, their ideas were often left unheard and unused. The leader didn't lead, they controlled. I haven't been in a group with naysayers. In school, I think those groups of naysayers are less common, because typically the groups just want to get the project done quickly. Naysayers would just prolong the project. Groups afflicted by groupthink are much more common, especially when people begin to label others as leaders and followers. I believe that for projects to work best, everyone should work as an equal team, instead of a leader with followers.
ReplyDeleteBrayden, I agree that the in school the most common thing is groupthink. The common goal of getting a good grade within the timeframe provided by the instructor really promotes this type of thinking. However, in my experience at work, I have seen more naysayers than groupthink. People either don’t want change or want to be the person that implements change so they naysay any other persons’ idea just to keep things the same and comfortable. They lose track of the end goal of making things better for the customer and focus on their own personal ideas and agenda. I believe that different settings and environments can create different types of problems in groups.
Delete-Heather Swan
I can definitely agree with this. In school, I see that getting a good grade on a project is often put in front of working together and learning something. The group will often put the load on one person and get it done as quickly as possible. I like your point and I would love to see a change in how group projects are done in school one day.
DeleteAlmost every group I recall being in during high school would fall under the “groupthink” category. In every subject, in every class, people would scrabble towards picking the smartest kid in the room at that subject, just to fall back and leave that kid to do the majority of the work. I have been guilty of this, especially during math classes or foreign languages. It is more simple and easier to defer to the one that seems to have more knowledge and skill in an area then to go out of your way to contribute. People like easy and simple after all. There were also occasions where I was the “leader” of the group, making decisions and giving ideas that the others would just agree to and offer no opinion of their own. The only time I can recall having a “naysayer” group would be during games with unclear instructions that required the group to decide on the next step towards winning. Mostly, however, it is usually the “groupthink” that I encounter.
ReplyDeleteI have definitely encountered "groupthink" groups more often than "naysayer" groups. Even if there is one person who is brave enough to voice their unique opinion I find that that idea is usually quickly shot down so the group can continue with their "shared" original idea. -Kate Draper
ReplyDeleteI also have seen more groups of "groupthink" than I have of "naysayers". In high school, people would often flock to the smartest person in a particular subject and rally behind their ideas because they were "smart". If a group did not have the smartest person in class with them, the members would usually get behind the person who was vocalizing their ideas the most and/or loudest and essentially let them be the "boss" of the group. I was a member of several groups with that type of leadership myself. That being said, I think that "groupthink" groups are much more common than groups of "naysayers" because a group cannot get very much accomplished if they are always disputing about ideas.
ReplyDelete-Kaylee George
I witnessed this and was apart of this in high school. In some classes I was the smart person people would flock to and ask for all the answers and I let it happen. I let my ideas take over and everyone just followed along. In other classes I would know the smartest person to go to for group projects, although when I was apart of a group and not the "leader" I would try to voice my opinions unlike others. I do agree with you, Kaylee, that "groupthink" is more common than "naysayers", although I have seen some successful groups when all they did was argue until they got the best idea that they could all agree on.
DeleteI agree! I think often, especially in high school, groups are more anxious to get the assignment done (possibly a product of a fixed mindset), that students often go along together whether they fully agree or not.
DeleteI think that we see groups with "groupthink" a lot, and I think it can be damaging. It is easy to voice your opinion when everyone has differing opinions, but as soon as it is everyone against what you really think, it is a lot harder to admit what you believe. It is also a lot easier to shoot down someone else’s ideas if they are the only one to think that way. Most people will fall in with the crowd and it limits diversity, creativity, and different perspectives and ideas. I think naysayers can also be harmful, if they refuse to believe or do anything that wasn’t their first idea or opinion. I think, if under control, they can bring a healthy dose of checks and balances to a group that does fall victim to groupthink.
ReplyDeleteAnother think another thing that really stood out to me in chapter five, was how people who never wanted to admit they were wrong or had faults, always ended up failing. It finally made me understand why interviewer will ask what your faults or weaknesses are. They are not really concerned with what your weaknesses are, but that you will admit you have them and are willing to work on them.
My group of friends in high school all had very different backgrounds, lifestyles, and had absolutely nothing in common. Any time we tried to make a decision of what to do or discussed personal and political ideals it resulted in hostile conversation. Everyone in the group was hard headed, making it difficult to discuss anything without it being a battle of will. In life, if you put a group of people in a committee like my circle of friends, that committee would get nothing done. I have never really seen or been a part of a groupthink circle, because I tend to be around other very assertive and opinionated people. On the other hand, I also see how easily people can fall prey to groupthink, because why think for yourself when someone can do all the heavy lifting for you?
ReplyDeleteMiKayla Lott
The majority of my groups fell into "groupthink" with the "smartest" kid leading. I am definitely guilty of this, and I am still working on sharing my thoughts. Though, I have also been in groups that never reached a consensus, because they were too caught up in their own agendas and images rather than the success of the group. Very seldom have I found myself in a selfless group, but they have always been the most successful and fulfilling ones.
ReplyDeleteI have found fixed mindset groups to be more common.i have seen groupthink occur over and over in my high school organizations. Every member tries to please the head officer to assure their acceptance. If you quarrel with one, you quarrel with them all. In groupthink, they are one.
ReplyDelete