TLB #48🧠 Groupthink kills Learning: How to spark real conversations
A bi-weekly inside scoop on all the hottest events, juicy discussions, and oh-so-many other exciting things happening in our dynamic L&D community. 🧡
Hello Shaker,
Here’s all that you’ll experience in today’s issue:
💡Learning Bites: Why Groupthink is a Learning Killer
🗓️ Community Calendar: Be part of local hub meet-ups to immersive series and interactive playgrounds happening in the Shakers Community
🖌️ Community Creations: Trailer for our Unscripted podcast is officially live on Spotify and Apple Podcasts!
🔖 Resource Reel: A collection of resources on career growth, facilitation and presentation design.
Learning Bites 💡
Imagine this: You’re in a meeting where an important decision needs to be made. As the discussion unfolds, no one raises objections—even though you suspect there are valid concerns. Why? Because everyone seems to agree, and speaking up feels risky. Later, the decision turns out to be flawed, but by then, it’s too late to change course.
This is Groupthink in action.
First introduced by Irving Janis (1972), Groupthink refers to the tendency of groups to prioritize consensus over critical thinking, leading to poor decision-making and suppressed dissent. This phenomenon manifests in organizational learning in various ways:
False consensus: People assume widespread agreement even when underlying concerns exist.
Pressure to conform: People hesitate to voice opposing viewpoints due to fear of social or professional consequences.
Lack of dissent: Alternative perspectives are dismissed or never raised, reducing innovation and learning potential.
Understanding the psychology of Groupthink
🧩 Cognitive biases contributing to passive agreement
Several biases reinforce groupthink in learning environments:
Confirmation bias: The tendency to seek out information that supports pre-existing beliefs while ignoring contradictory evidence.
Authority bias: Individuals are more likely to conform when ideas come from perceived authority figures.
Social desirability bias: Participants may align with the majority opinion to avoid conflict or gain social acceptance.
🛡 Psychological Safety
Amy Edmondson (1999) defines psychological safety as a belief that one can express ideas, questions, or concerns without fear of punishment or humiliation. Timothy R. Clark in his book lays out Four Stages of Psychological Safety—Inclusion Safety, Learner Safety, Contributor Safety, and Challenger Safety—each contributes uniquely to reducing groupthink by fostering an environment where dissent is encouraged, and diverse viewpoints are valued.
Stage One: Inclusion Safety: Preventing self-censorship
When team members don’t feel a sense of belonging and respect, they may self-censor to avoid exclusion or judgment. This reinforces the illusion of unanimity, a major symptom of groupthink.
For example: In meetings where younger employees feel included and valued, they might bring in a unique perspective or suggest a different way of approaching a problem, improving the overall solution instead of simply agreeing with senior voices.
Stage Two: Learner Safety: Encouraging intellectual curiosity & debate
Learner safety creates an environment where employees feel safe to ask questions, seek feedback, and challenge assumptions. Without it, teams rationalize warnings that contradict their existing beliefs, reinforcing groupthink.
For example: When onboarding new hires, if they are encouraged to ask ‘why’ rather than just being told ‘this is how we do things,’ they might point out inefficiencies or suggest new approaches that challenge outdated processes.
Stage Three: Contributor Safety: Creating Ownership & Accountability for diverse thinking
Contributor safety empowers individuals to share their expertise and insights without fear of criticism. Without it, teams defer to authority, suppressing unconventional but potentially game-changing ideas.
For example: When team members feel ownership over their work, they are more likely to speak up if they see an issue—such as pointing out a flaw in a product design before it moves to production, rather than assuming it must be correct because no one else has raised concerns.
Stage Four: Challenger Safety: Breaking the cycle of passive agreement
Challenger safety enables individuals to question the status quo and engage in constructive dissent. Without it, teams risk rationalizing poor decisions and ignoring early signs of failure.
For example: In a strategy meeting, if a team feels comfortable questioning an ambitious sales target that seems unrealistic, they might uncover critical risks and adjust the approach before committing to an unattainable goal.
🌬️The Ladder of Inference
The Ladder of Inference, introduced by Chris Argyris, explains how individuals process information, form beliefs, and take action—often in ways that reinforce biases and limit alternative perspectives. This mental shortcut can contribute to groupthink when teams make decisions without questioning their underlying assumptions.
How the Ladder of Inference reinforces Groupthink
Observing a situation – We perceive a situation but naturally focus on select details, filtering out other information.
Selecting data – We unconsciously prioritize certain facts based on past experiences and biases.
Adding meaning – We interpret the data through our lens, influenced by our existing beliefs.
Making assumptions – We fill in gaps with assumptions that align with our mental models.
Drawing conclusions – We decide what the situation means, often reinforcing the dominant viewpoint.
Forming beliefs – Our conclusions shape beliefs that influence future decision-making.
Taking action – We act based on these beliefs, potentially reinforcing flawed assumptions.
Strategies to spark real conversations to disrupt Groupthink
🎖️Dissent as a strength, not a threat
Create simulations where participants must challenge a dominant opinion.
Introduce structured dissent methods like "Red Team / Blue Team" exercises, where one group defends an idea and the others critique it.
Set up discussions where learners argue against their viewpoints to build comfort with dissent.
Teach participants about the "Ladder of Inference"—a model that shows how assumptions shape our beliefs and decisions—to help them understand different perspectives.
Publicly recognize team members who challenge ideas constructively.
Make “What are we missing?” a routine question in decision-making.
Many people hesitate to speak up in large groups. Instead of open discussion right away, start with:
—Think-Pair-Share – Give people time to reflect alone, then discuss in pairs before sharing with the whole group.
—1-2-4-All – Individuals reflect alone, then in pairs, then in groups of four before sharing ideas with the whole room.
If someone challenges an idea, thank them publicly:
“I love that you’re thinking thoroughly about this. Let’s explore that concern.”
Example in action: At Pixar, before any film moves into production, they hold a Braintrust Meeting where creators receive brutally honest feedback. It’s not about personal criticism but improving the work. The team has learned that dissent leads to stronger storytelling.
🔑 Making it safe to challenge authority
Be the first to admit mistakes. If you openly acknowledge “I got this wrong”, you show that imperfection is okay.
Invite challenges explicitly: “What are the flaws in this plan?” or “Who sees this differently?”
Hold silent brainstorming sessions before group discussions to prevent people from just following the loudest voices.
Design programs where leaders practice responding to dissent in role-play exercises.
Use case studies where ignoring dissent led to failure (e.g., The Challenger Disaster, Nokia’s downfall) to show why this matters.
Example in action: Intel’s "Disagree and Commit" culture, where employees are encouraged to challenge decisions before finalizing them, ensuring that dissent is structured into discussions.
🎭 Normalizing disagreement without conflict
Instead of listing rules, co-create psychological safety agreements with participants. Example:
✅ "It's okay to challenge ideas, not people."
✅ "Mistakes are learning moments, not failures."
✅ "Every voice matters—even if it’s a minority opinion."Write these on a shared board and revisit them throughout the session.
Teach the difference between disagreeing with ideas vs. disagreeing with people. Role-play how to say, “I see this differently” instead of “You’re wrong.”
Introduce "Yes, and…" techniques from improvisation to build on ideas rather than shutting them down.
Create “Pre-Mortem” meetings, where teams imagine a project has failed and discuss what could have gone wrong. This invites dissent before decisions are final.
Rotate the role of Devil’s Advocate in discussions to ensure diverse perspectives are considered.
Example in action: Amazon’s "Disagree and Commit" principle encourages leaders to challenge each other’s ideas passionately. But once a decision is made, everyone commits fully—ensuring both healthy debate and strong execution.
⭐ Building a feedback culture
Reward honest, constructive feedback, not just praise. Acknowledge those who point out blind spots.
Use "Feedback Rounds" where teams practice giving real-time, candid feedback in a structured way.
Train managers on how to handle difficult feedback conversations so they don’t instinctively shut down dissent.
Embed psychological safety assessments into performance review cycles.
Example in action: At Toyota, any worker—regardless of rank or experience—has the authority to stop the entire production line if they notice a defect or potential issue. This practice, called Andon, ensures that quality concerns are addressed immediately rather than being ignored out of fear of repercussions.
Structured discussion technique to disrupt Groupthink
🎩 De Bono’s six thinking hats
Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats is a structured technique that assigns different "hats" (modes of thinking) to guide discussions and prevent groupthink. Each hat represents a unique perspective, ensuring that ideas are explored from multiple angles.
How it works
⚪️ White hat: Facts & data: Focuses on objective information—what is known, what data is available, and what needs further research.
Example: What does our user research say about this idea?
🔴 Red Hat: Emotions & intuition: Encourages people to express gut feelings, fears, and instincts without justification.
Example: How do we feel about this decision on an emotional level?
⚫️ Black Hat: Caution & risks: Identifies potential downsides, obstacles, and risks to avoid blind optimism.
Example: What are the biggest reasons this approach could fail?
🟡 Yellow Hat: Optimism & benefits: Highlights positive aspects, opportunities, and best-case scenarios.
Example: What are the strongest advantages of this idea?
🟢 Green Hat: Creativity & alternatives: Encourages new perspectives, out-of-the-box thinking, and alternative solutions.
Example: What’s a completely different way to solve this problem?
🔵 Blue Hat: Process & facilitation: Guides the structure of the discussion and ensures that all perspectives are considered.
Example: Have we explored all angles before making a decision?
How to use the six Thinking Hats in a team discussion
1. Assign a Hat to each team member/group: Each person/group represents one perspective to ensure a balanced discussion.
2. Rotate Hats in a structured sequence: Flow for decision-making:
1️⃣ White Hat (facts first)
2️⃣ Red Hat (gut feelings)
3️⃣ Black Hat (risks)
4️⃣ Yellow Hat (benefits)
5️⃣ Green Hat (creative solutions)
6️⃣ Blue Hat (synthesizing next steps)
3. Use timeboxing for each Hat: Spend 3–5 minutes per hat to prevent dominance of one perspective and avoid overthinking.
Groupthink can quietly derail great decision-making—but with the right techniques, we can challenge assumptions and spark real innovation.
Your turn!
Over to you:
👉 Have you ever been in a group where everyone just agreed? How did you handle it?
👉 What’s your go-to strategy for encouraging diverse perspectives?
Drop your thoughts in the comments—I’d love to hear how you navigate this! 👇
Coming Up Next
Community Calendar 🗓️
Looking for ways to connect, learn, and grow with fellow professionals?
Check out our list of exciting events happening— from local hubs to community immersive series and interactive playgrounds, there's something for everyone— curated by the hardworking Core Team at L&D Shakers for YOU!
Community Creations 🖌️
🎙️ Big news, friends! The trailer for our Unscripted podcast is officially live on Spotify and Apple Podcasts!
Curious about what’s coming? We’re bringing you unfiltered, insightful conversations with experts who break down the learning frameworks and models shaping L&D today. Every other week, we’ll dive into topics that challenge, inspire, and level up your thinking.
Here’s a sneak peek at the brilliant minds joining us:
🔥 Guus van Deelen – L&D Quick Scan
🔥 Dinye Hernanda – Employee Development Framework
🔥 Arash Mazinani – 5Di
🔥 Zoltán László – 70-20-10
🔥 Toby Newman – Nudge Learning
🔥 Shaira – 5Di + MVP Testing
🔥 Matt Smolen – Storytelling
🔥 Gabrielle Sun – ADDIE + SAM
🔥 Daria Rudnik – Training from the Back of the Room
🔥 Saad Tariq – Human Performance Improvement & Andragogy
🔥 Marta Novella – Why-How-What (Simon Sinek)
🔥 Tzufit Herling – Community Canvas
🔥 Britt Brackenie – 12 Levers of Transfer Effectiveness
Huge thank you to Joost Brouwer for leading the way and making the magic happen! 🤩
Hit play, buckle up, and let’s explore the world of L&D together!
🎬 Bringing you a short intermission………….
Ever wondered if you're being paid what you're worth?💰 Or struggled to negotiate a better salary without solid data to back you up? You're not alone.
We're teaming up with our friends at Offbeat to uncover insights about compensation across our industry.
Curious about where your salary stands? Looking for data to negotiate better pay—for yourself or your team? This is your chance to contribute anonymously and get access to insights that matter.
Take the survey & help bring transparency to L&D salaries!
Cool Stuff You Don’t Wanna Miss Out
Career Dreamer – Grow with Google’s new AI-powered job search tool designed to help job seekers connect their skills, education, and experience with potential career opportunities. The platform enables users to craft a Career Identity Statement, a personalized summary that highlights their unique value—perfect for resumes, professional profiles, and interview prep.
Talent Development Career Pathways - ATD has designed a tool to help professionals explore the diverse roles within talent development and identify the best fit based on their skills and aspirations. It provides insights into the competencies needed for various roles, allowing users to map their career trajectory and pinpoint areas for growth.
The Audience Whisperer GPT- Presentation design is all about psychology, and great speakers deeply understand their audience. The Audience Whisperer GPT helps thought leaders uncover what truly drives their listeners—beyond just surface-level goals—so they can connect, engage, and inspire more effectively.
Facilitation Resources- Chris Corrigan’s collection of resources on group process methodologies, process architecture and maps and suites of tools to use during workshops.
Seeds for Change Guides- Packed with practical tips, real examples, and insights from experienced trainers, Seeds for Change offers free, adaptable resources to support your campaigns, co-ops, and projects. Plus, all guides are anti-copyright—copy, adapt, and share freely! Explore them here.
〜See you soon
Till then, keep spicing up your learning! 🧠🧂
Sejaal