Getting Beyond Groupthink and Ineffective Brainstorming

Steven Martin, PMI-ACP, PMP
Principal Consultant – Cottage Street Consulting
www.cottagestreetconsulting.com/resources
Wicked Smaht: Getting Beyond Groupthink
and Ineffective Brainstorming

Workshop Objectives
1. Be able to recognize factors for when you might
have groupthink
2. Learn from trends and research in groupthink and
brainstorming, and see how they are linked
3. Understand proven ways to combat groupthink and
have more impactful brainstorming
© 2017 Cottage Street Consulting

Couple housekeeping tips
 There is a (somewhat) interactive workshop
 Please feel free to ask questions
 But, want to respect our time box together
 May use a Parking Lot for questions
 To get electronic copy of the deck, see
conference website, connect via LinkedIn or
leave your card
 LinkedIn: Steven Martin or stevemartinpmp

Agenda
 Briefly introduce groupthink, brainstorming, and our
case study
 Review some research in groupthink and brainstorming
 Discuss techniques from the field to lesson groupthink
and generate greater idea generation outcomes
 Apply it: what would you do for the case study?
 Parting thoughts

INTRO:
GROUPTHINK AND
BRAINSTORMING

Does this look familiar?
 40 second video from The Simpsons
 Will ask what you saw…
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK-1fYhpq2Y

What is groupthink?
From social psychologist Irving Janis (1972):
 “…occurs when a group makes faulty decisions
because group pressures lead to a deterioration of
‘mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral
judgement.’”
 Groups tending to ignore alternatives
 “Decisions shaped by groupthink have low probability
of achieving successful outcomes.”
Source: http://www.psysr.org/about/pubs_resources/groupthink%20overview.htm

Conditions that foster groupthink
When groups have…
 Members of similar background
 Are insulated or siloed from outside opinions
 Have no clear rules to make decisions
 Under high pressure, causing low motivation/incentive
to realistically evaluate alternatives

To what degree do you feel groupthink at
your organization?
Things are great!
We’re Number 1!
Not bad, but could
use improvement.
I could literally
slap everyone
around me.

Case Study Intro: Background
 Publicly traded financial firm. Before “the incident”:1
 Net worth ~$1.5B and 1450 employees
 Accounted for ~17% trades on NYSE and NASDAQ.
 One group dealt with high frequency trading (HFT)
 “…computer driven formulas to capture profits from tiny
price movements.”2
 HFT accounts for 40-50% of all daily volume of trading 2
 CEO had 11years as CEO before “the incident”
Sources: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Capital_Group
2. http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/10/investing/treasuries-flash-crash/index.html

Case Study Intro: The Incident
 Software update to system that automatically routed
equity orders1,2
 Put in “testing” on limited number of servers for several
successive days
 For full rollout, replaced code on 7 of 8 servers
 Left 8th server exposed to trade using repurposed
algorithm switch for automatic trades
Sources: 1. Sharwood, S. (2013, Octtober 23). The Register. Retrieved from
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/23/lone_sysadmin_caused_462_meeellion_wall_street_crash/
2. (2013). SEC Incident Report. Retrieved from https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2013/34-70694.pdf

 In just 45 minutes:
 Lost over $460 million in trades they were liable to
fulfill1
 ~ 1/3rd of net worth of entire company
 Caused “wild swings” in share prices of almost 150
companies2
 Their trading executions constituted more than 50% of
trading volume on the markets that day1
 More than 2.5x’s normal volume
Sources: 1. (2013). SEC Incident Report. Retrieved from https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2013/34-70694.pdf
2. (2012, August 6). The Telegraph. London, UK. Retrieved from LexisNexis Academic database.

 Some quotes from the CEO:
 “It was a very big mistake. We screwed up. We paid the
price.”1
 “You can’t keep people from doing stupid things.”2
 Stock price dropped from $13.53 at start of year to $2.70
in pre-market trading ~5 days after the incident 1
Sources: 1. Robertson, D. (2012, August 6). The Times. London, UK. Retrieved from LexisNexis Academic database.
2. Robertson, D. (2012, August 3). The Times. London, UK. Retrieved from LexisNexis Academic database.

Let’s shift gears now…

What is brainstorming?
 Technique from ad exec Alex Osborn
(1950s)
 Intended for groups to develop ideas by
 Toss out as many ideas as possible
 Don’t worry about feasibility / craziness
 Build on ideas
 Don’t criticize
Source: Markman, A. (2017, May 18). Your team is brainstorming all wrong. Harvard Business Review Online.
Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2017/05/your-team-is-brainstorming-all-wrong.

Shout it out!
Where does
brainstorming
happen at your
organization?

Roman Vote
How well do you do brainstorming
at your organization?

Brainstorming yields poor results
Decades of studies show groups come up with less ideas
and of lower quality rather than if individuals do alone.
Source: Markman, A. (2017, May 18). Your team is brainstorming all wrong. Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2017/05/your-team-is-brainstorming-all-wrong.

6 Individual Behavioral Challenges that
lead into how people think in groups
1. Planning Fallacy – tasks take longer than you think
2. Availability Bias – over-emphasizing recent events or a
specific sequence of events (the first one may actually be
incorrect)
3. Optimism Bias – 80% of drivers think they are better than
average
4. Self-serving Bias – my side/opinion is right
5. Loss Aversion – Not wanting to suffer a loss; dislike losses
more than they like gains
6. Anchoring – I’m asking for X (i.e., salary negotiations)
Source: Sunstein, C. (2015, March 11). Getting beyond groupthink to make groups smarter. Harvard Business Review Webinar.
Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/webinar/2015/03/getting-beyond-groupthink-to-make-groups-smarter

4 Findings: Individuals vs. Groups
1. Individual biases are amplified by groups
2. Individuals take on more polarized views than what they held
before working in groups

Polarization and group decision making study
 The Colorado Experiment
 Anonymous poll - started off with overlap
 Split into like-minded groups for discussion
 Anonymous poll again – shifted in more polarized thinking
 Thinking as a group shifts individuals to move in the direction
of the pre-dispositioned tendency of that group
 If pre-dispositioned to be risky, after group, more risky
 If pre-dispositioned to be risk adverse, after group, more
risk adverse

4 Findings: Individuals vs. Groups
1. Individual biases are amplified by groups
2. Individuals take on more polarized views than what they held
before working in groups
3. Groups follow statements and actions of those who spoke or
acted first
4. Groups emphasize prevailing concepts
 Emphasize what is already known
 We’re missing the new innovative stuff!
 Those in minority remain hidden in their concepts

So how does this impact group decision making?
 Groups tend to get
confident, unified, and
often wrong.
 Won’t make decisions
necessarily more accurate
before they got together
in the first place.

Janis’ 8 Symptoms of Groupthink
1. Illusion of invulnerability – too much optimism
2. Collective rationalization – discount warnings
3. Belief in inherent morality – I’m right. You’re wrong.
4. Stereotyped views of “out” groups – often negative
5. Direct pressure on dissenters
6. Self-censorship
7. Illusion of unanimity
8. Self-appointed “mindguards” – protect against dissenting or
contradicting views to maintain cohesiveness, view and/or
decisions

The worst brainstorming meeting ever
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWT-A0w0AKY

COMBATTING GROUPTHINK FOR
BETTER BRAINSTORMING

Combating Groupthink: Devil’s Advocate
Short video:
Adam Grant:
Avoid Groupthink (in a real way)
What key messages resonate with
you from the video?
Source: Grant, A. (2016, August 5). Avoid groupthink (in a real way). McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p-uY_i-wvc

Devil’s Advocate Views:
 Assigning a devil’s advocate role won’t
generate behaviors expected
 Group knows it’s an assigned role
 Won’t listen, even if someone argues
passionately with dissenting viewpoint
 Need to unearth genuine devil’s
advocates who can argue their case.
Source: Grant, A. (2016, August 5). Avoid groupthink (in a real way). McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p-uY_i-wvc

 Skunk at a garden party
 Start with what you agree with;
disarm
 But state then what you don’t agree
with and why
 If we didn’t work here today, would we
still do X?
 Would we still release this product?
 Do this project?
Source: Sunstein, C. (2015, March 11). Getting beyond groupthink to make groups smarter. Harvard Business
Review Webinar. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/webinar/2015/03/getting-beyond-groupthink-to-make-
groups-smarter

Combating Groupthink: Red Teams
 The Red Team approach
 Assign a team of folks (not
just a devil’s advocate) to
“redline” a proposal or
outputs from another group
 Regular end-to-end risk
reviews with cross functional
team representation
Source: Sunstein, C., and Hastie, R. (2014, December). Making dumb groups smarter. Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2014/12/making-dumb-groups-smarter.

Combating Groupthink: Diversity of Thought
 Ensure diversity of teams
 Study of 230 board members - to alleviate
groupthink, introduce diversity of thought1
 Foster diversity in thinking
 Creating the “environment where all feel comfortable
in sharing their views and their authentic selves”2
 As leaders and members of teams, we have an
obligation to do this
Sources: 1. Johansson, A. (2017, July 20). Why workplace diversity diminishes groupthing and how millennials are helping.
Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/annajohansson/2017/07/20/how-workplace-diversity-
diminishes-groupthink-and-how-millennials-are-helping
2. Dias-Uda, A., Medina, C., & Schill, B. (2013). Diversity’s new frontier. Deloitte Insights. Retrieved from
https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/topics/talent/diversitys-new-frontier.html

Combating Groupthink: Diversity of Thought
Creating safer environments
As a facilitator:
Here are some
ground rules in
this session…
Please stop
talking over…
Please tell us
more about…
I noticed not all
of us haven’t
contributed…
who’s next?
Hang on.
Please stop
talking over…
Can we follow
our own ground
rules please…
That’s an
interesting take on
that. Please tell us
more about…
As a team member:
Pat and I were
taking about…Pat,
you want me to talk
about it, or would
you like to?

In Summary…
Some groupthink minimization strategies
 Authentic devil’s advocates or “skunk at dinner party”
 Red teams
 Proposals
 Risk reviews
 Ensuring environment to enable diversity of thought
 Obligations as leaders and team members

Combatting Brainstorming:
Brainswarming not Brainstorming
 Start with writing goal, outcome, or problem you are trying to
solve at the top
 Put the available resources at the bottom
 As needed:
 Break down goals, etc., into smaller goals
 Add resources as needed
 Create solutions in middle, matching (sub)goals with resources
Source: McCaffrey, T. (2014, March 24). Brainswarming: Because brainstorming doesn’t work. [Video] Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from https://hbr.org/video/3373616535001/brainswarming-because-brainstorming-doesnt-work

Image is screen shot from: https://hbr.org/video/3373616535001/brainswarming-because-brainstorming-doesnt-work

Image is screen shot from: https://hbr.org/video/3373616535001/brainswarming-because-brainstorming-doesnt-work
Results: 115 ideas in 15 mins brainswarming vs 100 ideas in 60 mins brainstorming

What do you think?
Why do you think
brainswarming could
work better than
brainstorming?

Delphi Technique
 Originally used to get estimates for work from a group of
experts
 Expand this concept so that we can generate alternatives and
solutions
 Harness power of individual and group input
 Some techniques include
1. Sticky Notes – in person
2. Google Docs, Box.com, or other interactive tool - virtual
3. Pair share – virtual or in person

Delphi Technique #1 – Sticky Notes
Tend to use with in person teams
 Facilitator displays goal or question
 As individuals, silently generate ideas, one idea per sticky note
 Timebox is typically 5-8 mins
 Individuals post stickies on wall
 Where stickies placed is unimportant at this point
 Group self-organizes ideas in to sub-categories
 Move sticky notes around, create a title for sub-category
 Discuss/debrief as group

Delphi Technique #1 – Sticky Notes

Delphi Technique #2 – Google Docs
Tend to use with virtual teams
 Option 1 (preferred):
 Facilitator displays goal or question
 As individuals, generate ideas
 Facilitator then gives link to online tool
 Individuals cut and paste into online tool
 Create subgroups as they cut and paste into tool
 Discuss as group
Subgroup 1 Subgroup 2 Subgroup 3
Idea 1-1 Idea 2-1 Idea 3-1
Idea 1-4 Idea 3-4
Idea 1-5 Idea 3-5
Idea 3-6
Idea 3-7
Idea 3-8
Idea 3-9
Idea 3-10
Idea 3-11
Idea 3-12

Delphi Technique #2 – Google Docs
Tend to use with virtual teams
 Option 2 – Everyone gets a line on
a spreadsheet:
 Facilitator displays goal or
question
 Facilitator gives link to online tool
 As individuals, generate directly
into online tool
 NO NAMES ON SPREADSHEET
 Pick whatever row no one is typing
into – self-organize…
 Discuss as group
 Sometimes get bias if people
look at others’ response first
Question: How are we going to do X?
Person 1 blah blah blah
Person 2 blah
Person 3 blah blah
Person 4 how about we…
Person 5 I think we should…
Person 6 we should just give up…
Person 7 blah blah blah blah
Person 8 here's what I think

Delphi Technique #3 – Pair Shares
 Tend to use with virtual and
in-person teams
 Put goal or question up first
 Pairs of twos form
 They discuss between themselves
and document using selected tool
 Hold together larger discussion
afterwards
Question: How are we going to do X?
Pair 1 blah blah blah
Pair 2 blah
Pair 3 blah blah
Pair 4 how about we…

6-3-5 Technique…
 Six experts each think of three ideas to solve a problem
 When done, pass ideas to person on the right
 The next person considers ideas and ADDS up to 3 more
ideas
 Keep passing until all 5 others get to add to the solutions
from the first person
 Do this silently
 Group gets together to discuss results, do any sub-grouping
Source: Markman, A. (2017, May 18). Your team is branstorming all wrong. Harvard Business Review Online.
Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2017/05/your-team-is-brainstorming-all-wrong

In Summary…
Some brainstorming idea generation strategies
 Brainswarming
 Delphi technique
 Sticky notes
 Google docs (or other electronic tool)
 Pair share
 6 – 5 – 3 technique

CASE STUDY – PART 2:
WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Case Study – What would you do?
 Let’s go back to our financial firm
 Get into small groups (3-4ish)
 Ponder two questions:
1. To what degree did groupthink
play in this situation?
2. What can be done to reduce
chances of this happening again?
 Timebox: 3 mins

Remember…the conditions that foster groupthink
When groups have…
 Members of similar background
 Are insulated or siloed from outside opinions
 Have no clear rules to make decisions
 Under high pressure, causing low motivation/incentive
to realistically evaluate alternatives

Some final thoughts
 There are many, many approaches and techniques to generate
ideas; these are only a few
 Regardless of technique:
 Be sure to take appropriate time
 This is not something to “get through” or “check a box”
 Openness, Respect, Courage, Transparency
 In person preferred over virtual
 Communications effectiveness
 Ability to draw

Q & A
 Steven Martin
 www.linkedin.com/in/stevemartinpmp
 www.cottagestreetconsulting.com

Additional References and Materials
Janis, Irving L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Janis, Irving L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and
Fiascoes. Second Edition. New York: Houghton Mifflin
Markman, Art. (2015). The problem-solving process that prevents groupthink. Harvard
Business Review Online. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/11/the-problem-solving-
process-that-prevents-groupthink
Price, K. H. (1993). Working hard to get people to loaf. Basic & Applied Social
Psychology, 14(3), 329-344

Getting Beyond Groupthink and Ineffective Brainstorming

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Getting Beyond Groupthink and Ineffective Brainstorming

Similar to Getting Beyond Groupthink and Ineffective Brainstorming (20)

More from Steven Martin

More from Steven Martin (7)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Getting Beyond Groupthink and Ineffective Brainstorming