. : MatthewDallman.com : . The Official Site for Matthew Dallman's Music, Art, & Writing

If you followed the controversy over the apparent large-scale mistakes made by the CIA in their assessments of the state of WMDs in Iraq, in the lead-up to the invasion in 2001, then you probably heard commentary on what is known as Group Think. I don't write this entry to talk about Iraq, but about group think. I have no personal experience with CIA dynamic (and if I did, since I just told you, I'd have to kill you).

So yes - group think. It is a fascinating group dynamic. Partly, I think, it is just a contemporary version of good old herd mentality, part of human life as far back as anyone can tell. A certain organization, as far as I can tell, with which I have had a limited association (now over) was afflicted, I believe, with this condition. Here are the symptoms, as cited by Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. (New York: Free Press), and online here and here. Every one of them hit the mark, to some extent:

Illusion of Invulnerability: Members ignore obvious danger, take extreme risk, and are overly optimistic.

Collective Rationalization: Members discredit and explain away warning contrary to group thinking.

Illusion of Morality: Members believe their decisions are morally correct, ignoring the ethical consequences of their decisions.

Excessive Stereotyping:The group constructs negative sterotypes of rivals outside the group.

Pressure for Conformity: Members pressure any in the group who express arguments against the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, viewing such opposition as disloyalty.

Self-Censorship: Members withhold their dissenting views and counter-arguments.

Illusion of Unanimity: Members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with the group's decision; silence is seen as consent.

Mindguards: Some members appoint themselves to the role of protecting the group from adverse information that might threaten group complacency.

I don't know how to solve group think once it starts (the website I link to above offers some hints). My own solution was simply to leave of my own accord. When collectives are poisoned, best to let it run its course without your involvement. I think the poison I felt had less to do with the personalities involved (save one) because there was a lot of big heart, minds, and talent in the group. I think it had to do, in this case, with the modes of communication within the collective - mostly email with some large-scale conference calls sprinkled in. It is the email, though, that was the worst, because it seems that MISinterpretation is effin' built into the email configuration, no? Haven't you had the worst of times talking about anything serious or emotionally volatile over the infernal email?

Anyway, group think - a dynamic that is good food for thought.