Groupthink In Engineering Teams
What is Groupthink?
As defined by Wikipedia, groupthink is:
a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome.
In simpler terms, it’s when a group makes a decision that isn’t based on evidence but on someone else’s desire for a specific outcome.
Common Examples
In no other field have I witnessed groupthink as much as in engineering organizations. Some common examples include:
- Open source projects where pull requests were accepted despite community feedback warning against it, with organizers disregarding concerns and moving forward with the change.
- Junior to mid-level engineers wanting to introduce new languages into a massive spaghetti codebase because “it will solve all our problems®.”
- Engineers adopting the “new frontend framework” for no reason other than that it’s new.
I’m almost certain every reader has a story or two to tell...
What Can You Do About It?
It’s incredibly frustrating when you encounter groupthink, especially when it’s clear what’s happening but no one else sees it as an issue. The best way to address it is by using the power of your voice. Here’s how:
-
Identify the "Pushers." These are the people strongly advocating for a specific decision. Strategically, start by talking to them individually to understand their true motives. For example, if someone is pushing for a new programming language, it might not be just about technical needs. Perhaps they’re looking to gain experience with that language to enhance their résumé or position themselves for external opportunities. Understanding these underlying motivations is essential to addressing groupthink effectively.
-
Have One-on-One Conversations. Avoid discussing this with everyone as a group, as that often solidifies their stance. Instead, speak to individuals one-on-one. Ask them basic questions like, “What made you decide this was the right choice? How would it solve our problem?” In cases of groupthink, most people can’t answer these questions coherently. Their arguments will lack depth, often because only one or two people are truly invested in the decision and unable to gain support on their own.
-
Understand Weaknesses in Their Arguments. Groupthink-driven arguments are often flimsy or inconsistent. This isn’t accidental—since only a few people are actively pushing for the decision, it’s tough for them to muster strong, logical support. Recognizing these weak points helps you build a case for addressing groupthink.
-
Escalate. Often, the only effective approach is to escalate the issue. Advice may suggest trying to convince individuals, but in fast-moving environments, this rarely works; decisions get made quickly, and you need to act fast. Escalation here means bringing your concerns to the managers of those advocating for the change, presenting weaknesses in their arguments, and explaining the costs of the decision if it proceeds.
In open-source projects, escalation might look a bit different. Here, think of the community as the “leadership.” If you’re fortunate to have an active community, you can bring your concerns to them instead.
Conclusion
Groupthink can be detrimental to an organization. It can steer a promising startup down the road of poor decision-making or derail an open-source project with unnecessary distractions. However, as with most conflict resolution, the solution revolves around communication and empathy for your teammates. Ultimately, escalation helps bring decision-making costs to light so that the organization fully grasps the impact of the choice.
That said, sometimes you have to decide if this is a hill worth dying on. You might find yourself saying, “You know what? It’s fine. Let’s introduce Go and see what happens.” In the end, you can only do so much.