Literature Review

9

Running Head: CONCEPT PAPER

Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Add the title of your research concept paper. A title should be 12 words or less.

Concept Paper Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Add the title.

Literature Review

[The psychological phenomenon is known as "groupthink" happens when a group of people's drives for uniformity or harmony leads to illogical and unreasonable decision-making. By concealing opposing ideas and separating them from outside influences, group thinking aims to reduce conflict and reach a decision without examining differences in viewpoints. The goals of this paper are to provide a more detailed explanation of "groupthink," its causes and effects on project management, as well as personal perspectives on the subject(Bang& Frith, .2017).] Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket Comment by Ricky Fenwick: delete Comment by Ricky Fenwick: drive Comment by Ricky Fenwick: This is the beginning of your research concept paper. You need to describe a research topic and its significance in this section. This section serves as the Introduction to your research concept paper. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Add a space after subject Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete period Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket

Theoretical Orientation for the Research Concept

["I use the term groupthink as a quick and easy way to refer to the mode of thinking that humans participate in when concurrence-seeking becomes so prevalent in a cohesive in-group that it tends to overwhelm rational appraisal of alternative courses of action," said Irving Janis, an American physiologist. Groupthink is a term similar to those used by George Orwell in his dystopian future of 1984 in his newspeak lexicon. In this context, the term "groupthink" has a derogatory connotation. (Street, .1997.) This impression can be strictly intended because the phrase refers to a decline in mental efficiency, reality checking, and moral judgments due to communal pressures. He referenced the Bay of Pigs catastrophe and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as case studies, claiming that it took decisions due to Groupthink, which prevented alternative viewpoints from being adequately conveyed and assessed. (Esser,2018) Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation with the year and the page number for the quote. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation with the year. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Move the period to the end of the citation so that the citation is included as part of the sentence. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete period Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Do not capitalize Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Move the period to the end of the citation so that the citation is included as part of the sentence. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Add a space after the comma

Another example is the 1986 Challenger Space Shuttle catastrophe. NASA management and engineers were aware of malfunctioning equipment months before the flight but remained silent to avoid negative publicity. Bias in critical judgments, as history has proven, can have terrible consequences and, in the worst-case scenario, end in people getting killed.] Comment by Ricky Fenwick: indent Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket

Review of the Literature

[Invulnerability, Rationale, Morality, Stereotypes, Pressure, Self-Censorship, Unanimity, and "Mind guards" are eight symptoms that lead to Groupthink. When group members provide unwarranted certainty and encourage other members to take excessive risks, this is invulnerability. Janis coined the phrase "illusion of invulnerability" to describe how their optimism blinds them to their choices' obvious hazards. This has the effect of making group members overlook warnings and other forms of negative input that, if taken seriously enough, might cause them to reconsider their decision. The group's morality can also impact the group's morality excessive faith in its integrity, allowing them to disregard the moral/ethical ramifications of their decisions. Other opposing groups were stereotyped as weak, dumb, or biased due to their genuine adherence due to trophies. Members who express doubt in the group or question the legitimacy of an alternative option not chosen by the majority are urged to recant to keep the status quo. This leads to self-censorship in the group, with members forced to remain silent and avoid deviating from the group consensus for fear of being harassed and isolated. Because no one wants to say anything, their silence is perceived as acceptance. This anxiety generates a sense of unanimity among the group, which leads to a mistaken assumption about the consensus' integrity. Unless there is an apparent dispute in the group when a group comes to a consensus position, each member will most likely believe that it must be true. Hence, reliance on consensual rationalization tends to supersede critical thinking ( Mackenzie, .2018). As Janis said, the term "mind guard" alludes to members electing themselves to protect the leader or other members from any dissenting information that would compromise their shared satisfaction with the efficiency and ethics of their previous judgments. Critical thinking is vital to a project team's effectiveness in a project management setting, and contrasting opinions are beneficial to a project manager since it ensures that can reach a consensus without jeopardizing the team's integrity.] Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Do not capitalize Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Do not capitalize Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket Comment by Ricky Fenwick: You only have one citation in your literature review. The review needs to be expanded to show what is in the literature on groupthink.

Synthesis of the Research Findings

A failing project resulting from Groupthink could cost the company millions of dollars in losses and lead to employee termination. Even though Groupthink has excellent intentions, such as greater cooperation, established harmony, and decreased stress levels among group members, the disadvantages far exceed the benefits, with sub-par decision making, projects of poor quality. Long-term relationships potentially wrecked (Pautz & Forrer, .2013).] Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket. This section is supposed to be a synthesis of the article reviewed in the literature review.

Critique of Previous Research Methods

[With the above literature review effort, writers played a critical part in decision-making at many levels. The authors, for example, have expressed concern over how students have been trained to relate to people from various leadership structures. The researchers' findings aided in developing more promising fair and competent approaches to dealing with difficulties in decision-making for all individuals, independent of status differences. Even though the discoveries were essential to the field of research, some of them supplied little or inaccurate information.] Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Provide a citation. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket. In this section, you review the different research methods used by researchers reviewed in the literature review.

Summary

[Groupthink is a fascinating issue to consider. When decision-making is rushed and organizations turn a blind eye to alternate options, Groupthink is a valuable tool for illustrating the consequences. A project manager's job in the project management industry is to make sure that the work done on a project's outcomes matches the expectations of the stakeholders or consumers. (Rose, .2016.) Even though the concept of Groupthink may have good intentions such as improved cooperation, established harmony, and lower stress levels among group members, the disadvantages outweigh the benefits; with sub-par decision making, projects of poor quality, and long-term relationships potentially being ruined, the cons outweigh the benefits.] Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Delete bracket. Assignment 2 ends here and goes to References.

Group thinking principles and fundamentals in organization

[In layman's words, Groupthink is the tendency for people in a group to think alike due to peer pressure and a desire to avoid isolation. Individuals' creativity, originality, and independent thinking are harmed by Groupthink because it forces them to avoid discussing any controversial concerns or matters or even coming up with alternate solutions to a problem. This causes team members to become fragmented, resulting in an "in-group" that believes, with inflated certainty, that the best decision has been made. The "in-group" vastly overestimates its decision-making capabilities while grossly underestimating the capacities of those who do not comply, or the "out-group."]

Background

[Janis' study project's significant ideas are to work on group thinking concepts and decision-making skills. Janis described three forerunner reasons to Groupthink in his book Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes: "High group cohesion," "Structural flaws," and "Situational context." According to Janis, Groupthink is caused by a high level of cohesiveness. It's no surprise that project teams that aren't cohesive will make poor decisions; yet they aren't prone to Groupthink. Structural faults are when a group or team organizes itself in ways that compromise information communication and begin to engage in careless decision-making. This can be further broken down by four criteria: "Insulation of the group", where inaccurate postulations on matters that the group is dealing with are promoted, leading to flawed solutions to the issue. The "lack of impartial leadership" refers to where leaders completely control the flow of the group discussion by planning what is discussed and the questions that are permitted to be asked. The "lack of "norms requiring methodological procedures" means the lack of a formalized approach for dealing with decision-making tasks. Finally, there is "homogeneity of individuals' social origins and ideology," which means that all team members have the same values. Low self-esteem as a result of recent failures can lead to group acceptance for fear of being labeled "weak." Groupthink can be induced by difficulty in making decisions and time demands where members are more concerned with speed than quality. Finally, moral challenges such as conflicting feelings might lead to group thought in a team.]

Research Problem

[He defines group thought as a psychological phenomenon in which members of a group try to reach an agreement. He sees it as a willingness to put aside opinions and personality traits to fit in with the greater group. The groupthink hypothesis is widely regarded as one of the most influential theories in organizational leadership. Members of the decision-making class have been known to build such close bonds that they cannot go against the group's decisions and agree upon them. Compliance is required regardless of the decision's impact on the individual. The silence of minority opinions over those of the majority, on the other hand, can have disastrous consequences. It could have catastrophic consequences, such as the abandonment of ethics, the endorsement of destructive policies, and the distortion of reality.]

Research Question

[The publication is significant in my research since it is a quantitative study of the phenomenon of group mentality. It is the first work to demonstrate the validity of the concept of Groupthink through the use of qualitative data.]

Goals and Objectives

The primary objective of the research is to research the effects of Groupthink being either a positive or a negative force in a business. The article was submitted to the journal of international energy policies and accepted. The author argues that the business environment being what it is today, it is necessary to have a form of Groupthink that will ensure that the organization has effective leadership. In turn, it will follow the leader in the decision they make, thus working as a unit towards attaining the goal. The article is essential in my research because it points towards the critical role that leaders play in the creation of a group mentality (Wagner & Hollenbeck, .2020)

1. Goal one. to establish groupthink norms that are fundamental strategies to decision making

2. Goal two. Technological devices possess inherent features and resources that are instrumental in contributing to working as a group but ultimately deciding as an individual

3. Goal three. Point off decision errors made by leaders

Population and Sample

[As such, for any organization to be effectively competitive, then the power to make the big decisions must be left to individuals. Such is the case with some of the largest companies that were dependent upon deciding to ensure they soared. Examples include Facebook with Zuckerberg, Amazon with Jeff Bezos, Microsoft with Bill Gates, and Tesla Motors with Elon Musk. The assertions by Wagner are in line with other arguments that are against Groupthink. Groupthink creates the group's comfort to fall back on, and as a result, people do not think about the adverse effects of their decisions. It is an argument that will be essential when factoring Groupthink hinders creativity.

Methodology and Procedures

Quantitative Research

N/A

References

Bang, D., & Frith, C. D. (2017). Making better decisions in groups. Royal Society open science, 4(8), 170193. https://dx.doi.org/10.1098%2Frsos.170193 Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Place the journal title and Volume number in italics. Capitalize each word in a journal title.

Esser, J. K. (2018). Alive and well after 25 years: A review of groupthink research . Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 73(2-3), 116-141. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2758 Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Remove italics. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: capitalize Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Place the Volume number in italics.

Mackenzie, K. D. (2018). A theory of group structures: Basic theory. Routledge. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Place the book title in italics.

Miranda, S. M. (1994). Avoidance of groupthink: Meeting management using group support systems. Small-Group Research, 25(1), 105-136. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F104649649425100 Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Place the journal title and Volume number in italics.

Pautz, J. A., & Forrer, D. A. (2013). The dynamics of groupthink: The Cape Coral experience. Journal of International Energy Policy (JIEP), 2(1), 1-14. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: delete

Rose, J. D. (2016). Diverse perspectives on the Groupthink theory–a literary review. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 4 (1), 37–57.

Street, M. D. (1997). Groupthink: An examination of theoretical issues, implications, and future research suggestions. Small-Group Research, 28(1), 72-93. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1046496497281003 Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Place the journal title and Volume number in italics.

Wagner, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2020). Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage. Routledge. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Make the first line flush with the left margin. Comment by Ricky Fenwick: Place the book title in italics.