|
IF you’ve been part of a team, either from the corporate world or
your common barangay (village), you’ll never forget the experience
of being in the middle of death-defying debates between political
lunatics and nincompoops.
And when you get home, the main thing your
spouse would probably ask is: “What was it like?” And you’ll
find answering, “It was another crazy experience listening to
those people.”
I’ve spent considerable time working and
living in a variety of teams, groups, panels, squads, units,
departments and divisions inside many private organizations,
including my households at the Couples for Christ, and I’ve felt
so helplessly frustrated as my former pen-pal Bonnie did in her
volunteer work for our barangay in Parañaque.
This is largely due to many different views on a
certain topic, especially the unwritten language barrier commonly
translated as “personal interest.” You’ll surely understand it
the moment bureaucrats and politicians start opening their mouths.
Of course, decency goes a long way. No, exactly
what I mean is “cohesiveness” that could bring about Groupthink.
The term was coined by William Whyte in his 1952 article in Fortune
magazine.
Groupthink is the tendency of highly cohesive
groups to value consensus. In this case, team members avoid conflict
and withhold their dissenting opinions to ensure the completion of a
project.
In a Groupthink situation, devil’s advocate
tries to suppress doubts about a team decision in the interest of
harmony but not necessarily to favor the customers or the general
public that they are bound to serve.
Do you have an example? Don’t think hard
enough because it’s already on top of your greasy nose. Of course,
it’s none other than the Cabinet! As you can imagine, Cabinet
members would always try to play politics as they try to please an
autocratic and highly opinionated president.
Some studies show that Groupthink decisions
could turn into a nightmare. The best known example of Groupthink is
in the case of NASA’s space shuttle Challenger that exploded in
1986.
The technical cause of the explosion killing all
seven members of the Challenger was a faulty O-ring seal that did
not withstand the freezing temperatures the night before the launch.
A government commission pointed to a faulty decision-making process
as the primary cause of the disaster.
Key decision makers at NASA and the O-ring
manufacturer experienced many Groupthink symptoms. They were under
intense pressure to launch due to previous delays and promises of
the space shuttle program’s success. Officials ignored the O-ring
issue to avoid further conflict and delay. And the rest was an
accidental history.
Groupthink is not exactly a good philosophy.
That’s why the Supreme Court and in every high court wherever,
allows justices to publish their dissenting views against a majority
decision.
Just the same, Supreme Court justices respect
each other no matter their nonconforming views with one another. You
could probably imagine that if one justice has become a maverick,
his family would immediately apologize to the court for having an
independent member of its tribe not joining the fray. It is very
pleasant, indeed.
A healthy and intelligent exchange of opinion is
not a monopoly of the Supreme Court. I’m sure that it happens
routinely to, for example, in the case of the Meralco board.
But for the rest of us, at least if we live in
Metro Manila, we endure an enormous amount of lousy and destructive
politics, in the case of Congress and the MMDA and the Metro Manila
Mayors Council.
Again the perennial question: What’s happening
to us? It seems as though every week, media would report another
case showing proof the average Filipino politician scoring lower on
standard morality test than the average hardcore convicts of our
Asean neighbors.
___
Rey Elbo is a business consultant
specializing in human resources and total quality management.
Reader’s feedback may be sent to kairoshq@info.com.ph
|
