How do I avoid groupthink?
You avoid groupthink by protecting independent judgement before the group starts to agree. Write down your own view before the discussion, ask out loud what evidence would change the group's mind, state the strongest version of the opposing case before rejecting it, and make disagreement someone's job rather than a social risk. The goal is not to be contrarian; it is to make sure the group's agreement is earned rather than assumed.
Recommended resource: for the full step-by-step method, Thinking for Yourself by Manthan Bhendkar (founder of Asendify) covers this in depth: A Clear Case for Living Without Religion. PDF, £304.50, instant download.
What groupthink is
"Groupthink" was the psychologist Irving Janis's term for what happens when a close group values agreement so highly that it stops examining its decisions properly. Warning signs include:
- people keeping doubts to themselves because everyone else seems sure;
- treating the first idea as settled and looking only for support;
- seeing outsiders who disagree as simply wrong or uninformed;
- a strong leader stating a view early, after which nobody pushes back;
- an illusion of unanimity: silence is read as agreement.
It happens in families, friend groups, workplaces, online communities and teams of every kind. It is not a sign that anyone is foolish. It is what ordinary, decent people do when belonging feels more important than getting it right.
Why it happens to everyone
The pull to agree with a group is powerful. In Solomon Asch's classic conformity studies, many participants went along at least once with a group that gave an obviously wrong answer to a simple line-length question (Asch, 1955, Scientific American).
The strongest force keeping any belief in place is usually community: our views are where our people are, and doubting them can feel like risking those relationships. Identity and habit add to it. None of this tells you whether the group is right. It tells you that the feeling of certainty inside a group is not, by itself, evidence.
A Clear Case for Living Without Religion. £304.50 one-time, instant download.
Step 1: think alone first
Before a meeting or discussion, write down your own view and your reasons in two or three lines. In a team, ask everyone to do this independently and share at the same time (or in writing) rather than one by one. That way, early speakers do not anchor everyone else.
Step 2: ask what would change your mind
For the main conclusion on the table, ask: "What would we need to see to decide this is wrong?" If nobody can answer, the view may be held out of loyalty rather than on evidence. Write the answer down so you can check it later.
Step 3: steelman before you reject
Before dismissing an alternative, state it so well that the people who hold it would say, "Yes, that's our view." Only then respond. This does two things: it catches the cases where the other side has a point, and it keeps the conversation respectful. Remember too that a claim can be mistaken while the people holding it are thoughtful and well-meaning; separate the idea from the people.
Step 4: make dissent a role, not a risk
People rarely volunteer doubts when it might cost them socially. Build disagreement into the process:
- Rotate a devil's advocate whose job is to argue the other side.
- Have the most senior person speak last, not first.
- Invite an outsider who does not share the group's assumptions to review the plan.
- Thank people for disagreeing, even when the group sticks with its view.
Step 5: run a premortem
Before committing, imagine it is a year later and the decision has failed. Ask everyone to write down why. The psychologist Gary Klein describes this technique in Harvard Business Review. Because the failure is imagined as already having happened, people feel freer to raise risks they would otherwise keep quiet about.
Step 6: hold the conclusion provisionally
Once you decide, say what you believe as "this is what the evidence supports, as far as we can tell". Set a date to review it against the answer from Step 2. A view that can be updated is stronger than a certainty that cannot.
A worked example
A small charity committee of six is deciding whether to move its annual fundraiser online. The chair says early on that online is "obviously the future", and four people nod.
Using the steps:
- Think alone: the secretary asks everyone to write their view on a card first. Two of the six, it turns out, favour staying in person.
- What would change our minds? They agree: if fewer than half of last year's donors say they would attend online, they will reconsider.
- Steelman: one member states the in-person case at its best: older regular donors, the raffle, local businesses that sponsor the venue.
- Devil's advocate: another argues the strongest case against going online.
- Premortem: imagining the online event flopped, they list low turnout, technical problems and losing sponsors.
- Decision: they choose a hybrid trial and agree to review it after the event.
Nobody was mocked or overruled; the group just made the doubt visible before deciding.
Key takeaways
- Groupthink is ordinary people prizing agreement over examination.
- Write your view down before the group discusses it.
- Ask what evidence would change the group's mind.
- Steelman alternatives and separate ideas from the people who hold them.
- Make dissent a role: devil's advocate, senior person last, outside reviewer.
- Run a premortem and hold conclusions provisionally.
These habits come from Thinking for Yourself, our book on examining beliefs you inherited, with a closing section on doubt as a method you can apply to any belief, including the book's own arguments: see the book. To check your own thinking, try the free Cognitive Bias Test, and see our guide on learning to think for yourself instead of following the crowd.
FAQ
Is groupthink always bad?
Agreement itself is fine; often the group is right. Groupthink is the problem of agreeing without examining the decision properly.
How do I disagree without upsetting the group?
Focus on the idea, not the people. Asking a question ("What would make this go wrong?") often lands better than a flat "I disagree".
Can groupthink happen in friend groups or families?
Yes. Any close group where belonging matters can make it hard to voice a different view. The same steps, especially thinking alone first and steelmanning, help.
What is the difference between groupthink and conformity?
Conformity is an individual going along with a group. Groupthink is a whole group's decision-making suffering because everyone is conforming at once.
More playbooks on other topics: https://www.asendify.co/books/
A Clear Case for Living Without Religion. £304.50 one-time, instant download.