We have learned from extensive research that groups are subject to group polarization and groupthink. Group polarization happens when members of the group all come to accept a more extreme point of view. Groupthink occurs when group members reason that they cannot be wrong and reject any argument contrary to their own—rejecting criticism from internal members and criticism from people in out-groups. Groupthink reduces members’ sharing of information, which may result in a less realistic decision in favor of a more biased one.
Describe a real-life example of groupthink or group polarization that you have personally witnessed or experienced.
Describe a scenario in which groupthink or group polarization in your example could have been stopped by using any of the following: counterarguments, conferring with someone outside of the group, critically evaluating every member’s ideas, or using smaller breakout groups. You can also choose a strategy that has not been listed here.
Sample Answer
Simulated Example of Groupthink: The Ill-Fated Project Launch
Scenario: In a past role (simulated), I was part of a cross-functional team within a technology company tasked with launching a new software product. The product had been in development for months, and there was immense pressure from senior leadership to hit the ambitious launch date.
Manifestation of Groupthink:
- High Cohesiveness & Pressure: The team was highly cohesive, composed of talented individuals who had worked well together on previous successful projects. There was a strong "we're the best" mentality. The impending deadline created intense pressure to agree and move forward quickly.
- Illusion of Invulnerability: Several minor bugs and user interface issues were identified during late-stage testing. However, the team leader, a charismatic and well-respected individual, consistently downplayed these, suggesting they were "minor aesthetic issues" or "edge cases" that could be fixed post-launch. The team, eager to please the leader and meet the deadline, readily accepted this optimistic assessment.
- Collective Rationalization: Any concerns raised by junior developers or QA testers (e.g., "This feature occasionally crashes under heavy load," "Users are consistently confused by this navigation") were rationalized away. Arguments included: "It'll be fine with our robust servers," "Users just need to get used to it," or "We don't have time to fix it now, it's not a showstopper."