Abilene paradox: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Explanation: Explain that the Abilene paradox is a special case of the psychological phenomenon of groupthink
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 18: Line 18:
The Abilene Paradox, 2nd Edition |date=2002 |publisher=CRM Learning |accessdate=May 20, 2012}}</ref> for [[management]] education.
The Abilene Paradox, 2nd Edition |date=2002 |publisher=CRM Learning |accessdate=May 20, 2012}}</ref> for [[management]] education.


The Abilene paradox is similar to [[groupthink]], but differs in significant ways, including that in groupthink individuals are not acting contrary to their conscious wishes and generally feel good about the decisions the group has reached.<ref name="Sims1994">{{cite book|author=Ronald R. Sims|title=Ethics and Organizational Decision Making: A Call for Renewal|date=1 January 1994|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|isbn=978-0-89930-860-9|pages=55–56}}</ref> In the Abilene paradox, the individuals acting contrary to their own wishes are more likely to have negative feelings about the outcome.
The Abilene paradox is a [[special case]] of the psychological phenomenon of [[groupthink]]. In groupthink, individuals may or may not be acting contrary to their conscious wishes and may or may not feel good about the decisions the group has reached.<ref name="Sims1994">{{cite book|author=Ronald R. Sims|title=Ethics and Organizational Decision Making: A Call for Renewal|date=1 January 1994|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|isbn=978-0-89930-860-9|pages=55–56}}</ref> In the Abilene paradox, ''all'' individuals are acting contrary to their own wishes and ''all'' of them are more likely to have negative feelings about the outcome.


Like groupthink theories, the Abilene paradox theory is used to illustrate that groups not only have problems managing disagreements, but that agreement may also be an issue in a poorly functioning group.<ref name="Levi2010"/>
Groupthink theories, including the Abilene paradox theory, are used to illustrate that groups not only may have problems managing disagreements, but that agreements may also hide problems in a poorly functioning group.<ref name="Levi2010"/>


==Research==
==Research==
Line 43: Line 43:
* ''[[The Wisdom of Crowds]]''
* ''[[The Wisdom of Crowds]]''
* [[Unintended consequence]]
* [[Unintended consequence]]
* [[Unscrupulous diner's dilemma]]
{{div col end}}
{{div col end}}


Revision as of 08:51, 9 January 2014

In an Abilene paradox a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of many of the individuals in the group.[1][2] It involves a common breakdown of group communication in which each member mistakenly believes that their own preferences are counter to the group's and, therefore, does not raise objections. A common phrase relating to the Abilene paradox is a desire to not "rock the boat".

Explanation

The term was introduced by management expert Jerry B. Harvey in his article The Abilene Paradox: The Management of Agreement.[3] The name of the phenomenon comes from an anecdote in the article which Harvey uses to elucidate the paradox:

On a hot afternoon visiting in Coleman, Texas, the family is comfortably playing dominoes on a porch, until the father-in-law suggests that they take a trip to Abilene [53 miles north] for dinner. The wife says, "Sounds like a great idea." The husband, despite having reservations because the drive is long and hot, thinks that his preferences must be out-of-step with the group and says, "Sounds good to me. I just hope your mother wants to go." The mother-in-law then says, "Of course I want to go. I haven't been to Abilene in a long time."

The drive is hot, dusty, and long. When they arrive at the cafeteria, the food is as bad as the drive. They arrive back home four hours later, exhausted.

One of them dishonestly says, "It was a great trip, wasn't it?" The mother-in-law says that, actually, she would rather have stayed home, but went along since the other three were so enthusiastic. The husband says, "I wasn't delighted to be doing what we were doing. I only went to satisfy the rest of you." The wife says, "I just went along to keep you happy. I would have had to be crazy to want to go out in the heat like that." The father-in-law then says that he only suggested it because he thought the others might be bored.

The group sits back, perplexed that they together decided to take a trip which none of them wanted. They each would have preferred to sit comfortably, but did not admit to it when they still had time to enjoy the afternoon.

This anecdote was also made into a short film[4] for management education.

The Abilene paradox is a special case of the psychological phenomenon of groupthink. In groupthink, individuals may or may not be acting contrary to their conscious wishes and may or may not feel good about the decisions the group has reached.[5] In the Abilene paradox, all individuals are acting contrary to their own wishes and all of them are more likely to have negative feelings about the outcome.

Groupthink theories, including the Abilene paradox theory, are used to illustrate that groups not only may have problems managing disagreements, but that agreements may also hide problems in a poorly functioning group.[6]

Research

The phenomenon is explained by social psychology theories of social conformity and social influence which suggest that human beings are often very averse to acting contrary to the trend of a group.[6][7] According to Harvey, the phenomenon may occur where individuals experience action-anxiety — stress concerning potential negative attitudes to them of the group if they do not go along. This action-anxiety arises from what Harvey termed "negative fantasies" — unpleasant visualizations of what the group might say or do if individuals are honest about their opinions — where there is "real risk" of displeasure and negative consequences for not going along and the individual has "separation anxiety", fearing exclusion from the group.[8][9]

Applications of the theory

The theory is often used to help explain extremely poor group decisions, especially notions of the superiority of "rule by committee." For example, Harvey himself cited the Watergate scandal as a potential instance of the Abilene paradox in action.[10] The Watergate scandal occurred in the United States in the 1970s when many high officials of the administration of then President Richard Nixon, a Republican, colluded in the cover-up and perhaps the execution of a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in Washington, D.C. Harvey quotes several people indicted for the cover-up as indicating that they had personal qualms about the decision but feared to voice them. For one instance, campaign aide Herbert Porter said that he "was not one to stand up in a meeting and say that this should be stopped", a decision he then attributed to "the fear of the group pressure that would ensue, of not being a team player".[10]

A technique mentioned in the study and/or training of management, as well as practical guidance by consultants, is that group members, when the time comes for a group to make decisions, should ask each other, "Are we going to Abilene?" to determine whether their decision is legitimately desired by the group's members.

See also

References

  1. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2007.02.012, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1016/j.infsof.2007.02.012 instead.
  2. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1504/IJISCM.2006.008286, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1504/IJISCM.2006.008286 instead.
  3. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1016/0090-2616(74)90005-9, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1016/0090-2616(74)90005-9 instead.
  4. ^ "The Abilene Paradox, 2nd Edition". CRM Learning. 2002. Retrieved May 20, 2012.
  5. ^ Ronald R. Sims (1 January 1994). Ethics and Organizational Decision Making: A Call for Renewal. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 55–56. ISBN 978-0-89930-860-9.
  6. ^ a b Levi, Daniel (28 April 2010). Group Dynamics for Teams. SAGE Publications. p. 108-109. ISBN 978-1-4129-7762-3.
  7. ^ Vasu, Michael L.; Debra W. Stewart; G. David Garson (3 March 1998). Organizational Behavior and Public Management, Third Edition, Revised and Expanded. Taylor & Francis. pp. 136–137. ISBN 978-0-8247-0135-2.
  8. ^ Pownall, Ian. Effective Management Decision Making. Bookboon. p. 223. ISBN 978-87-403-0120-5.
  9. ^ Wilcox, Clifton (2010). Groupthink: An Impediment to Success. Xlibris Corporation. pp. 137–141. ISBN 978-1-4500-6099-8.
  10. ^ a b Harvey, Jerry (Summer 1988). "The Abilene Paradox: the Management of Agreement". Organizational Management. 17 (1). American Management Association: 19-20.

Further reading

  • Harvey, Jerry B. (1988). The Abilene Paradox and Other Meditations on Management. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books. ISBN 0-669-19179-5
  • Harvey, Jerry B. (1996). The Abilene Paradox and Other Meditations on Management (paperback). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0-7879-0277-2
  • Harvey, Jerry B. (1999). How Come Every Time I Get Stabbed in the Back, My Fingerprints Are on the Knife?. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0-7879-4787-3

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abilene_paradox&oldid=589896945"