The Impact of Groupthink in Modern Businesses with Mediation of Digital Technology
Name
Institution
The Impact of Groupthink in Modern Businesses with Mediation of Digital Technology
数字技术商科代写 Today in the era of digital technologies, there is a lot of information running through people’s lives and more so in business organizations.
Introduction
We have a million thoughts in our minds every day. These thoughts may be useful, while others are not. In the old days, things were slow-paced, and people used to take time to think through things before sharing. Even then, there was some thought that people kept to themselves not to stir the status quo. Today in the era of digital technologies, there is a lot of information running through people’s lives and more so in business organizations (Westerman & Bonnet, 2015). Everyday experience has an impact on one’s life be it bad or good.
The same case applies to business, particularly in due to globalization, workplace diversity and digital technology. The communication and interaction between workers and managers determine the level and type of relationships that are forged. These relationships are determined by the interpersonal business environment that is intentionally or unintentionally created by the management. Nonetheless, groupthink comes into play when individuals from different backgrounds and cultures interact in an organization or group setting. 数字技术商科代写
Mob mentality and how its propagated has changed at the emergence of mobile technologies, especially the internet and social media.
People interact online, and geographical barriers no longer exist. Social platforms have created the most convenient ways through which people share ideas and experiences (Cardon & Marshall, 2015). People also use social media to express their culture, beliefs, and value. When these individual lives and experiences are shared, other people get into contact with them and directly or indirectly influence their thinking and perception on some issues in their life.
This form of globalization has developed the integration of societies and people as well as businesses. How people think and act when in groups or because of group influence is referred to as groupthink or mob mentality. It describes the behaviour in which people act the same way or adopt similar behaviors as the people around them-often, ignoring their feelings in the process. Groupthink has a positive and negative impact on modern businesses and hence needs dynamic management to remain positive.
译文：
介绍 数字技术商科代写
我们脑子里每天都有一百万个想法。这些想法可能有用，而其他想法则没有。在过去，事情节奏很慢，人们过去常常在分享之前花时间思考事情。即便如此，也有人认为人们会保持沉默，不要搅乱现状。在数字技术时代的今天，人们的生活中包含大量信息，商业组织中的信息更是如此（Westerman & Bonnet，2015 年）。每天的经历都会影响一个人的生活，无论是好是坏。
同样的情况也适用于商业，特别是由于全球化、工作场所多样性和数字技术。工人和经理之间的沟通和互动决定了所建立关系的级别和类型。这些关系是由管理层有意或无意创造的人际商业环境决定的。尽管如此，当来自不同背景和文化的个人在组织或群体环境中互动时，群体思维就会发挥作用。
随着移动技术的出现，特别是互联网和社交媒体的出现，暴民心态及其传播方式发生了变化。
人们在线互动，地理障碍不再存在。社交平台创造了人们分享想法和经验的最便捷方式（Cardon & Marshall，2015）。人们还使用社交媒体来表达他们的文化、信仰和价值观。当这些个人的生活和经历被分享时，其他人就会与他们接触，并直接或间接地影响他们对生活中某些问题的思考和看法。
这种形式的全球化促进了社会、人民和企业的融合。人们在群体中或由于群体影响而思考和行动的方式被称为群体思维或暴民心态。它描述了人们以与周围人相同的方式行事或采取相似行为的行为——经常在此过程中忽略他们的感受。 Groupthink 对现代企业有积极和消极的影响，因此需要动态管理来保持积极。
Statement of the Problem
The concept of groupthink originated from the Seminole work of Irving Janis in 1972. He defined groupthink as “when people approach a problem or issue as a collective group – no matter what the fact is – instead of acting and thinking as individuals” (Janis, 1972). The observation is evident in diverse case scenarios where people are together for a common course. This has prompted much debate academic sphere in the last four decades. It occurs when people who are organized and well-intentioned make irrational and non-optimal decisions in the bid to confirm or to avoid dissent. Groupthink can be as a result of the group’s individual’s need for harmony and coherence rather than rational expression.
In the business world, things follow what appears to be trends, but in general sense, they are herd instinct in to play and influencing decision making.
The desire to be inclined to the majority way is a perfect representation of our intuition and business organizations. In almost every area of business, there is herd mentality in action, from buying of overpriced IPO to business outsourcing, social media marketing, and management inefficiency. The attitude exists due to disharmony in the chain of command and to conform to the conventions in the group.
Globalization has taken many businesses beyond the confines of borders.
The emergence of new technologies has made it possible for people to broaden their thinking through multi-cultural interactions (Esser, 2013). Technologies have also increased the connection between local and overseas markets. That means data, information, and ideas are shared quickly than ever before. Currently, there are no studies to link groupthink and globalization that has been facilitated by technology advancement and their overall impact on modern businesses. As such, the gap between groupthink, digital technologies, and business needs to be filled with research for managers to be able to make informed decisions that will uphold positive groupthink.
译文：
问题陈述 数字技术商科代写
群体思维的概念起源于欧文·贾尼斯 (Irving Janis) 于 1972 年在塞米诺尔 (Seminole) 的著作。他将群体思维定义为“当人们以集体的方式处理问题或议题时——无论事实如何——而不是作为个体行动和思考”（贾尼斯1972）。在人们聚在一起学习共同课程的不同案例场景中，观察结果很明显。这在过去的四年里引起了学术界的很多争论。当有组织且善意的人为了确认或避免异议而做出非理性和非最佳决定时，就会发生这种情况。群体思维可能是群体个体需要和谐与连贯而非理性表达的结果。
在商业世界中，事物遵循看似趋势的事物，但从一般意义上讲，它们具有参与和影响决策的本能。
倾向于多数人的愿望是我们直觉和商业组织的完美体现。几乎在每个业务领域，从购买价格过高的 IPO 到业务外包、社交媒体营销和管理效率低下，都存在从众心理。这种态度的存在是由于指挥链中的不和谐以及为了遵守集团内的惯例。
全球化使许多业务超越了国界。
新技术的出现使人们可以通过多元文化互动拓宽思维（Esser，2013 年）。技术也增加了本地和海外市场之间的联系。这意味着数据、信息和想法的共享速度比以往任何时候都要快。目前，没有研究将技术进步及其对现代企业的整体影响所促进的群体思维与全球化联系起来。因此，群体思维、数字技术和商业之间的差距需要通过研究来填补，以便管理者能够做出明智的决策，支持积极的群体思维。
Research Purpose
The purpose of this research is to examine the impact of groupthink in modern business in the context of digital technology developments. Though the idea is more than four decades old, it has not been well-researched from the perspectives of digital technologies and business impact. Various case studies and experiments on herd mentality will be explained and analyzed to expound on the idea. The case studies will form the basis of the research to answer the question of its impact on businesses. Both the positive and negative implications of groupthink will be identified. It will be evaluated from the management perspective and offer recommendations for best practices for positive groupthink environment.
译文：
研究目的 数字技术商科代写
本研究的目的是检验群体思维在数字技术发展背景下对现代商业的影响。 尽管这个想法已有 40 多年的历史，但尚未从数字技术和业务影响的角度进行深入研究。 将解释和分析关于从众心理的各种案例研究和实验，以阐明该想法。 案例研究将构成研究的基础，以回答其对企业的影响问题。 群体思维的正面和负面影响都将被确定。 它将从管理的角度进行评估，并为积极的集体思维环境提供最佳实践建议。
Literature Review
Groupthink
Groupthink was found to be more detrimental to the businesses (Pautz & Forrer, 2013). It is not favourable for optimal business performance. Human beings are inherently social and want communal belonging. As such, it is a natural desire for workers to be part of the larger crowd. The need damages the ability to make the right decisions. People have evolved to be influenced by others near them instead of trusting their instinct.
Therefore, groups are less responsive to changes in their natural environment (Torney, Lorenzi, Couzin, & Levin, 2015). This is detrimental to creativity and innovation in the workplace as the more boisterous tend to drown out those who are more thoughtful and meticulous. People fear being an outsider to a group they belong to and hence are uncomfortable to air opinions that might conflict with the majority of seniors. Therefore, the management should have a culture where workers are free to give their advice, concerns, ideas, or dissent without fear of being victimization.
Similarly, Caulfield & Smith (2009) found that the many mistakes that management make are attributed to groupthink. Many other scholars have supported this opinion since Irving Janis introduced it. Most of them believe that it was responsible for many fiascos they saw, including Bay of Pig, Pearl Harbor attack, and escalated Korean conflicts. Besides, they also noted that American involvement in Vietnam, the Marshall Plan, and the cover-ups in Westgate break-in were all as a result of groupthink (Rose, 2011; Heinemann & Farrell, 1994). Therefore, if it finds its way into the business then it will have negative implications.
译文：
文献评论 数字技术商科代写
群思
Groupthink 被发现对企业更不利（Pautz & Forrer，2013 年）。这不利于最佳业务绩效。人类本质上是社会性的，需要共同的归属感。因此，工人成为更大人群的一部分是一种自然的愿望。这种需要损害了做出正确决定的能力。人们已经进化为受附近其他人的影响，而不是相信自己的直觉。
因此，群体对其自然环境的变化反应较弱（Torney、Lorenzi、Couzin 和 Levin，2015 年）。这不利于工作场所的创造力和创新，因为更喧闹的人往往会淹没那些更体贴和细致的人。人们害怕成为他们所属群体的局外人，因此对可能与大多数老年人发生冲突的言论感到不安。因此，管理层应该营造一种文化，让员工可以自由地提出建议、关注、想法或异议，而不必担心受到伤害。 数字技术商科代写
同样，Caulfield & Smith (2009) 发现管理层犯的许多错误都归因于群体思维。自从欧文·贾尼斯 (Irving Janis) 提出这一观点以来，许多其他学者都支持这一观点。他们中的大多数人认为，这是他们所看到的许多惨败的原因，包括猪湾事件、珍珠港袭击事件和朝鲜冲突升级。此外，他们还指出，美国对越南的介入、马歇尔计划以及对韦斯特盖特闯入事件的掩盖都是集体思维的结果（Rose，2011；Heinemann & Farrell，1994）。因此，如果它找到进入业务的方式，那么它将产生负面影响。
Moreover, Pautz and Forrer (2013) outline three conditions attributable to groupthink in a business.
They include the existence of cohesion groups, faults in organizational structure, and situational factors. When the three conditions are present in the organization at varying degrees, they are likely to hinder the overall organizational performance. Cohesion is the relationship between people in a particular group. It assesses how individuals in that group trust and honour each other. When high cohesion, it promotes groupthink due to the respect and loyalties individuals owe to the group (Heinemann & Farrell, 1994, p. 73).
In such group members are less likely to disagree with overall group opinion, and sharing of personal opinion is hence limited. On the other hand, are the faults in the organizational structure and which fall into four categories according to Rose (2011) and Heinemann and Farrell (1994). They include groups isolation and insulation from expert opinions that could influence decision-making for the better. There is no impartial leadership, and hence norms and processes of doing things in the organization are missing. Lastly, due to the member’s social background differences, the group lacks cooperation.
译文：
此外，Pautz 和 Forrer (2013) 概述了企业中群体思维导致的三个条件。 数字技术商科代写
它们包括凝聚力群体的存在、组织结构的缺陷和情境因素。当这三种情况在组织中不同程度地存在时，很可能会阻碍组织的整体绩效。凝聚力是特定群体中人们之间的关系。它评估该群体中的个人如何相互信任和尊重。当内聚力高时，由于个人对群体的尊重和忠诚，它会促进群体思维（Heinemann & Farrell, 1994, p. 73）。
在这样的小组中，成员不太可能不同意整个小组的意见，因此个人意见的分享是有限的。另一方面，是组织结构中的缺陷，根据 Rose（2011）和 Heinemann 和 Farrell（1994）分为四类。它们包括群体隔离和专家意见的隔离，这些意见可能会影响更好的决策。没有公正的领导，因此在组织中缺少规范和做事流程。最后，由于成员的社会背景差异，小组缺乏合作。
Therefore, there are observable characters identifiable with groupthink, and that plays a critical role in decision-making at the workplace (Heinemann & Farrell, 1994).
The group members may have the feeling that they are not invulnerability, but the issues affective the organizations since they believe they are insulated and protected by the group (Rose, 2011). The member views their grouping as the only source of morality in the organization and hence have superiority over others on matters affecting the organization. Because the group is thinking moves individuals, they tend to collaborate in defence of irrational decisions with facts. When one is not part of the group, he/she is treated with stereotypes like being labelled a traitor for non-conformity.
Group members are conscientious as to what they say or do to avoid being criticized by others in the group and hence promoting self-censorship in decision-making and during communications. People in a group acts as if everyone agrees to everything that the majority in the group support or opines and hence gives it a false unanimity. There is pressure from other members for everyone to conform to the group’s opinion rather than stand for individual beliefs. Overall, internal groups are source groupthink because they lack contingency plans (Ahlfinger & Esser, 2001).
译文：
因此，群体思维具有可识别的可观察特征，这在工作场所的决策中起着关键作用（Heinemann & Farrell，1994）。 数字技术商科代写
团体成员可能会觉得他们并非无懈可击，但这些问题会影响组织，因为他们认为自己受到团体的隔离和保护（Rose，2011）。成员将他们的团体视为组织中道德的唯一来源，因此在影响组织的事务上优于其他人。因为团队的思维会影响个人，所以他们倾向于合作以事实来捍卫不合理的决定。当一个人不属于该团体时，他/她会受到刻板印象，例如因不符合而被贴上叛徒的标签。
小组成员认真对待他们所说或所做的事情，以避免被小组中的其他人批评，从而在决策和沟通过程中促进自我审查。一个群体中的人表现得好像每个人都同意群体中大多数人支持或认为的一切，因此给它一个虚假的一致。来自其他成员的压力要求每个人都遵从团体的意见，而不是支持个人的信仰。总体而言，内部群体是源群体思维，因为他们缺乏应急计划（Ahlfinger & Esser，2001）。
Globalization, Technology, and Organizational Interpersonal Communication
Globalization has drastically transformed organization interpersonal communication. It has led to a permanent shift in the domains of knowledge that enables any individual from any geographical area to access extensive information and resources (Greig, 2002). People can gain understanding through a touch button and have choices of access that are exponentially rising. As a result, companies can hire employees that are located in other parts of the world. The communication modes such as video calling simplify conversation between colleagues across the globe and almost making it feel that they are in the same room. Businesses can connect with suppliers and customers from all over the world and streamline the relationships through improved ordering system, shipment, among other capabilities. Companies are creating opportunities through technologies.
However, there is a factor of cultural diversity in organizations that comes with globalization. Transnational communication and work diversity bring about cross-cultural communications and interactions, which are critical aspects of herd mentality in the globalized market. Groupthink is about group influence in an organization that shapes how decisions are made and resources are used. According to Singh (2014), global managers have a role in developing employee motivation to take part in various activities of the organization. This can be achieved through good mastery of organizational interpersonal communication skills that recognize work dynamics and structure that can create negative groupthink.
译文：
全球化、技术和组织人际沟通 数字技术商科代写
全球化已经彻底改变了组织的人际沟通。它导致了知识领域的永久性转变，使任何地理区域的任何个人都能够访问广泛的信息和资源（Greig，2002 年）。人们可以通过触摸按钮获得理解，并拥有成倍增加的访问选择。因此，公司可以雇用位于世界其他地区的员工。视频通话等沟通方式简化了全球同事之间的对话，几乎让人感觉他们在同一个房间。企业可以与来自世界各地的供应商和客户建立联系，并通过改进的订购系统、发货等功能简化关系。公司正在通过技术创造机会。
然而，全球化带来了组织中的文化多样性因素。跨国交流和工作多样性带来了跨文化交流和互动，这是全球化市场从众心理的关键方面。 Groupthink 是关于组织中的群体影响力，它塑造了决策的制定方式和资源的使用方式。根据 Singh (2014) 的说法，全球经理在培养员工参与组织各种活动的积极性方面发挥着作用。这可以通过很好地掌握组织人际沟通技巧来实现，这些技巧可以识别可能产生负面集体思维的工作动态和结构。
Additionally, digital technology has transformed how communication is done in modern businesses.
Traditionally, business communications were done through letters and one-on-one conversations. The digital technology has moved transfer of information to a new realm where messages areas almost instantly delivered, tasks are assigned and managed by computers, and face-to-face communication has been removed from the equation. Despite the advancement in workflow and efficiency through communication, there are significant concerns about the quality of business relationships and management. One of these concerns is the effect of mob thinking that is attributed to increased sharing between employees and but increased distance amongst them and top management.
Morgan and Symon (2002) found the use of digital platforms like e-mail and the internet to communicate remotely with staff increases their remoteness and isolation. Kim, Kim, Han, Jackson, and Ployhart (2017) established microlevel influence through management creates proactiveness in workers and hence, their contribution towards the betterment of the organization. Managers have the role of maintaining close contact with the employee even digital communication is offering the best option for communication. Proximity in interpersonal communication determines the influence a manager has in promoting positive groupthink.
译文：
此外，数字技术改变了现代企业的沟通方式。 数字技术商科代写
传统上，商务交流是通过信件和一对一对话完成的。数字技术已将信息传输转移到一个新领域，在该领域中，信息几乎可以立即传递，任务由计算机分配和管理，面对面的交流已从等式中删除。尽管通过沟通提高了工作流程和效率，但人们对业务关系和管理的质量存在重大担忧。这些担忧之一是暴民思维的影响，这归因于员工之间的共享增加，但他们与高层管理人员之间的距离增加。
Morgan 和 Symon (2002) 发现使用电子邮件和互联网等数字平台与员工进行远程通信会增加他们的偏远和孤立。 Kim、Kim、Han、Jackson 和 Ployhart（2017 年）通过管理建立了微观层面的影响力，从而使员工积极主动，从而为改善组织做出贡献。经理的职责是与员工保持密切联系，即使数字通信提供了最佳的沟通选择。人际交往中的接近程度决定了经理在促进积极的集体思维方面的影响。
Moreover, intercultural communication in the modern workplace creates anxiety and uncertainty.
Uncertainty is cognitive and refers to the level of knowledge and predictability about another person. Anxiety, on the other hand, is the level of discomfort that one has when interacting with another. According to Neuliep (2019), effective and efficient intercultural communication depends on the management of uncertainties and anxieties between various groups and individuals in an organization. In the context of multicultural companies that heavily rely on diversified work teams, the communication and interaction between people from different nationalities, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and skills bring about the issues of uncertainty and anxiety.
It takes the manager’s group intercultural competence to create an environment of trust and harmony without invoking groupthink tendencies (Schmidmeier & Takahashi, 2018). It begins with intercultural learning on how an employee interacts with each other, and the use of their drives to build on interdepartmental and hierarchical communications both horizontally and vertically. In so doing, a positive and motivated workforce is created, and negative herd mentalities eliminated.
译文：
此外，现代工作场所的跨文化交流会产生焦虑和不确定性。 数字技术商科代写
不确定性是认知的，指的是关于另一个人的知识和可预测性的水平。另一方面，焦虑是一个人在与另一个人互动时的不适程度。根据 Neuliep (2019) 的说法，有效和高效的跨文化交流取决于对组织中不同群体和个人之间的不确定性和焦虑的管理。在高度依赖多元化工作团队的多元文化公司的背景下，不同国籍、性别、种族、性取向和技能的人之间的交流和互动带来了不确定性和焦虑的问题。
在不引发群体思维倾向的情况下，需要管理者的群体跨文化能力才能创造信任与和谐的环境（Schmidmeier & Takahashi，2018）。它始于关于员工如何相互互动的跨文化学习，以及利用他们的动力来建立横向和纵向的跨部门和层级沟通。这样做可以创造积极主动的劳动力，消除消极的从众心态。
Negative and Positive Groupthink
In the above context, it is imperative to explain how groupthink theory positively and negatively affects various environments. An experiment was conducted with middle school with a control group to establish the effect of groupthink. A group of students was assigned a task in a classroom where they were supposed to work computer lab and library activities. The expectation was that they would use collaboration as middle school students through cohesion that motivates them to have positive results (Meyers, 2010).
The experiment was therefore hypothesized that the group would work for better outcomes. The results indicated individuals in a group come with an array of knowledge and skills. As such, it was concluded that when groupthink is positive, group members will be free to challenge each other and contribute to offering alternative strategies and solutions to problems. According to Meyers (2010), positive groupthink also gives individuals the ability to verbalize their though proves and hence, create social motivation awareness. However, the findings from the research were quite the opposite of the expectations. It was found that individual assignments and quizzes were performed better than group assignments.
译文：
消极和积极的集体思考 数字技术商科代写
在上述背景下，必须解释群体思维理论如何对各种环境产生积极和消极影响。以中学为对照组进行实验，以确定群体思维的效果。一组学生被分配到教室里的一项任务，他们应该在那里进行计算机实验室和图书馆活动。期望他们会像中学生一样通过凝聚力来使用协作，激励他们取得积极的成果（Meyers，2010）。
因此，该实验假设该小组会为更好的结果而努力。结果表明，一个群体中的个人拥有一系列知识和技能。因此，得出的结论是，当群体思维是积极的时，群体成员将可以自由地相互挑战，并有助于提供替代策略和解决问题的方法。根据 Meyers (2010) 的说法，积极的群体思维还使个人能够用语言表达他们的想法，从而创造社会动机意识。然而，研究结果与预期完全相反。结果发现，个人作业和测验比小组作业表现得更好。
Another example of a positive impact of groupthink is the recent global phenomena of black Fridays.
The day after Thanksgiving Day and day before weekend mark the largest days in shopping. On these days, you will see rational buyers regress to outdo each other to buy an item. The question that can be raised why people forgo a relaxing holiday with friends and family to struggle through stampede so they can save 30 percent on the item they want. A study by Byun and Mann (2011) from Auburn University found that shopping experience is enhanced when there are many people around and hence turns a bad experience to a fun. What is seen objectively wrong becomes good when there are more people around us. Black Friday is a perfect depiction of groupthink where people take bad experiences but feel good about it regardless of the mess of screaming, hair pulling, and crying around them. The example forms one positive aspect of herd mentality.
A negative example of groupthink outcomes was observed in an experiment on geriatric health care teams. A wife, a terminally ill husband, was given training on how to take full-time care of him. A geriatric team was assigned to the couple for consultation. When the wife asked for help from the doctors, instead of heeding her request, they ignored her and put the man in nursing care (Heinemann & Farrell, 1994). It was then established that doctors ignored the caregiver because the patient wanted to stay at home. When the wife requested assistance, she relinquished her status as a caregiver, and hence doctors took over and force him for proper care (Heinemann & Farrell, 1994). The action by the team of doctors, in this case, is a negative groupthink that used collective action to influence the outcome of a decision.
译文：
群体思维产生积极影响的另一个例子是最近的全球黑色星期五现象。 数字技术商科代写
感恩节后一天和周末前一天是购物最多的日子。在这些日子里，你会看到理性的买家倒退，争先恐后地购买一件物品。可以提出的问题是，为什么人们放弃与朋友和家人一起度过轻松的假期，以便在踩踏事件中挣扎，以便他们可以在想要的物品上节省 30%。奥本大学 Byun 和 Mann (2011) 的一项研究发现，当周围有很多人时，购物体验会增强，从而将糟糕的体验变成一种乐趣。当我们周围有更多的人时，客观上被认为是错误的事情就会变得很好。黑色星期五是对集体思维的完美描述，在这种情况下，人们接受了糟糕的经历，但不管周围的尖叫、扯头发和哭泣的混乱情况如何，他们都会感觉良好。这个例子形成了从众心态的一个积极方面。
在老年保健团队的实验中观察到了集体思维结果的一个负面例子。一位身患绝症的妻子接受了如何全职照顾他的培训。一个老年病小组被分配给这对夫妇进行咨询。当妻子向医生寻求帮助时，他们没有理会她的请求，而是不理会她，并让该男子接受护理（Heinemann & Farrell，1994）。然后确定医生不理会看护人，因为病人想呆在家里。当妻子请求帮助时，她放弃了她作为照顾者的身份，因此医生接手并强迫他接受适当的照顾（Heinemann & Farrell，1994）。在这种情况下，医生团队的行动是一种消极的群体思维，它使用集体行动来影响决策的结果。
Notably, both positive and negative impacts of groupthink are critical in organizational, interpersonal communication.
The most prominent benefit of the theory is improved reasoning and attainment of task with more than one person (Solomon, 2006). He found that in a group setting that allows free expression and dissents, individuals gain the ability to current errors, uncover presuppositions, and identify new ideas. Also, the research has established that the use of positive groupthink turn non-expert group to produce better results than group experts that are affected by negative herd mentality.
On the other hand, negative groupthink is detrimental to the organization. It has been attributed to the collapse of Enron and the tragedy of the Challenger. Workers ignored warnings since the group members were so myopic to see the bigger picture (Caulfield & Smith, 2009). There is also a belief that the U.S military faces hardships in non-state warfare due to the existence of groupthink in the military personnel (Corum, 2009). According to Brege (2010), herd mentality encourages stereotyping and taking of short-cuts. Overall, negative impact includes peer pressure, forcing individuals to change the mind, withholding essential information, and irrational decision-making.
译文：
值得注意的是，群体思维的正面和负面影响对组织的人际沟通都至关重要。 数字技术商科代写
该理论最突出的好处是提高了推理能力和多人完成任务的能力（Solomon，2006）。他发现，在一个允许自由表达和异议的群体环境中，个人获得了纠正错误、发现预设和识别新想法的能力。此外，研究表明，与受消极从众心态影响的群体专家相比，使用积极的群体思维可以使非专家群体产生更好的结果。
另一方面，消极的群体思维对组织不利。它被归咎于安然的倒闭和挑战者的悲剧。工人们忽略了警告，因为小组成员太近视了，无法看到更大的图景 (Caulfield & Smith, 2009)。还有一种观点认为，由于军事人员中存在群体思维，美国军队在非国家战争中面临困难（Corum，2009）。根据 Brege (2010) 的说法，从众心态鼓励刻板印象和走捷径。总体而言，负面影响包括同伴压力、迫使个人改变主意、隐瞒重要信息和非理性决策。
Modern global leaders have a role in harnessing positive groupthink.
Rose (2011), Heinemann and Farrell (1994) and Meyers (2010) outlined some strategies towards achieving effective and efficient organization including; 1) creating a work environment that is open to criticism. 2) The manager should be impartial. 3) organizational communication should be free of personal preferences. 4) cross-cultural communication management. 5) managers should acknowledge work diversity by employing people from different social backgrounds and mainly include local people. 6) managers should embrace expert opinions and create room for consultation. 7) the management should ensure that organizational communication is open, honest and direct. 8) encourage the devil’s advocates and alternative suggestions. 9) have a strategic contingency plan. 10) roles should be designated for each member of the group.
Furthermore, groupthink occurs in all organizations but at various levels. Janis (1972) noted that groupthink takes either positive and negative forms. In each case, it is viewed as a way through which people try to maintain the cohesion of a group by being unanimous with others instead of having independent thoughts for better solutions. It is not uncommon for a manager to exercise caution when giving negative opinions to the boss.
There are many areas of imperfection in all organizations. People find it challenging to know when to speak their minds or when to reserve their opinions. A manager can keep on repeating the wrong and end up losing organizational goodwill and customers. Enron and WorldCom are perfect examples of poor corporate relationships that created room for negative groupthink (Scharff, 2005). The solution to these problems depends on the organizational structure and interpersonal competence.
译文：
现代全球领导者在利用积极的群体思维方面发挥着作用。 数字技术商科代写
Rose (2011)、Heinemann and Farrell (1994) 和 Meyers (2010) 概述了一些实现有效和高效组织的策略，包括： 1) 创造一个可以接受批评的工作环境。 2) 经理应该是公正的。 3）组织沟通应该不受个人喜好的影响。 4）跨文化交际管理。 5) 管理者应承认工作的多样性，雇佣来自不同社会背景的人，主要包括当地人。 6) 管理者应接受专家意见并创造协商空间。 7) 管理层应确保组织沟通是公开、诚实和直接的。 8）鼓励魔鬼的拥护者和替代建议。 9) 制定战略应急计划。 10) 应为组中的每个成员指定角色。
此外，群体思维发生在所有组织中，但发生在不同级别。 Janis (1972) 指出群体思维有积极和消极两种形式。在每种情况下，它都被视为人们通过与其他人保持一致而不是为了更好的解决方案而独立思考来保持团队凝聚力的一种方式。经理在向老板提出负面意见时谨慎行事的情况并不少见。
所有组织中都有许多不完善的地方。人们发现知道何时说出自己的想法或何时保留自己的意见具有挑战性。经理可能会不断重复错误，最终失去组织的善意和客户。安然和世通是糟糕的企业关系的完美例子，为消极的集体思维创造了空间（Scharff，2005）。这些问题的解决取决于组织结构和人际交往能力。
Additionally, at the lower level are the employees, and groupthink shapes their attitude and opinion about the organization and the management (Janis, 1972).
Since the goal of any rational organizational management is to create positive groupthink, managers should strive to instil a culture of innovations and creativity and give a positive outlook to the workplace. Unfortunately, negative herd mentality can surface and impact the decision making and hence, which is challenging to eliminate. Management should always watch to keep group mentality positive because it can be irreversible when it enters the organization.
Janis (1972) concluded that all organizations are prevalent in groupthink, be it positive or negative. Therefore, the manager needs to understand its symptoms to identify its presence in the organization. Global leaders can use it to work for the benefit of the company. When it is positive, employees will praise the company with customers and co-workers. Managers in the global market should always work to achieve a positive culture. It can be derived from the active management of cross-cultural communications and interpersonal interactions among the workers, customers, and management.
Digital technology particularly social media also has critical role in influencing positive groupthink. Individuals in the group can use social posts on a company’s platform to air their opinion and express their feelings without victimization. The power of social media in influencing decisions and creating cohesion within groups cannot be underestimated. Overall, the target for every management is to use any strategy to build teamwork in the bid to improve productivity and efficiency. This way, the support staff will feel motivated to share and be part of company’s leadership and success.
译文：
此外，在较低级别是员工，群体思维塑造了他们对组织和管理的态度和看法（Janis，1972）。 数字技术商科代写
由于任何理性组织管理的目标都是创造积极的集体思维，因此管理者应努力灌输创新和创造力的文化，并为工作场所提供积极的前景。不幸的是，消极的从众心态会浮出水面并影响决策，因此很难消除。管理层应该时刻注意保持积极的群体心态，因为它进入组织后可能是不可逆转的。
Janis (1972) 得出结论，所有组织都普遍存在集体思维，无论是积极的还是消极的。因此，经理需要了解其症状以识别其在组织中的存在。全球领导者可以使用它来为公司谋取利益。当它是积极的时，员工会与客户和同事一起称赞公司。全球市场的管理人员应始终努力实现积极的文化。它可以源自对员工、客户和管理层之间跨文化交流和人际互动的积极管理。
数字技术，尤其是社交媒体，在影响积极的群体思维方面也发挥着关键作用。群内的个人可以在公司平台上使用社交帖子发表意见和表达自己的感受，而不会受到伤害。社交媒体在影响决策和在群体内创造凝聚力方面的力量不容小觑。总体而言，每个管理层的目标都是使用任何策略来建立团队合作，以提高生产力和效率。这样，支持人员将有动力分享并成为公司领导和成功的一部分。
Case Study
It was on January 28th, 1986, when the fatal decision was made to launch the space shuttle Challenger (Griffin, n.d). Seven astronauts lost their lives as the shuttle exploded and shattered in Atlantic Ocean. The reason for the accident is the low temperatures. The air temperature that fateful day was 15°F lower than on previous launches. The engineers had brought their concern about the temperature being too low and hence questioned the performance of “O-ring seal” in such condition. However, their fears were disregarded, and the decision was made to go forward. The shuttle exploded several 73 seconds after the launch. It was later found that the physical cause of the tragedy was O-ring failure. More other studies were conducted and found that there existed cognitive bias – groupthink in the decision-making process.
There was three decision making groups, including the United States government, Morton Thiokol engineers, and NASA managers. 数字技术商科代写
There were four levels of management in NASA. Level 1 and 2 were the Associate Administrators and National Space Transportation managers respectively. Level 3 and 4 were the central program managers that dealt with engineers and were the contractors for the design of the shuttle respectively. All the management structures had to certify in writing on the take-off readiness on the parts they were responsible. The process of review and certification started at level 4 upwards to level 1. Notably, the malfunction that occurred in the past was considered as part of flight readiness review.
Additionally, there was also a critical item list for the multiple parts that made the shuttle. The incident narrowed down to essential critical 1 and 1R whose failure could cause loss of life and vehicle. The management was supposed to be notified on the condition of critical 1 item, and they can result from delaying or restriction in launch until the item is reviewed and establish no problem can occur.
Therefore, groupthink occurred when the administrators under time pressure ignored engineers’ concerns about the performance of O-ring partly because of bad press and need to make the company effort timely (Janis, 1982). Thiokol engineers had noted the problem and notified the top management. It was about irrational decision-making under uncertainty and needed to please stakeholders rather than miscommunication.
译文：
案例分析 数字技术商科代写
1986 年 1 月 28 日，做出了发射挑战者号航天飞机（格里芬，日期不详）的致命决定。当航天飞机在大西洋爆炸并破碎时，七名宇航员丧生。事故的原因是低温。命运之日的气温比之前的发射低 15°F。工程师们担心温度太低，因此质疑“O形密封圈”在这种情况下的性能。然而，他们的恐惧被无视，决定继续前进。航天飞机在发射73秒后爆炸。后来发现悲剧的物理原因是O形圈故障。进行了更多的其他研究，发现决策过程中存在认知偏差——群体思维。
共有三个决策小组，包括美国政府、Morton Thiokol 工程师和 NASA 管理人员。
NASA 有四个级别的管理。 1 级和 2 级分别是副行政人员和国家空间运输经理。 3 级和 4 级是与工程师打交道的中央项目经理，分别是航天飞机设计的承包商。所有管理结构都必须以书面形式证明他们负责的部分的起飞准备情况。审查和认证过程从第 4 级开始，直至第 1 级。值得注意的是，过去发生的故障被视为飞行准备审查的一部分。
此外，还有一份关于制造航天飞机的多个部件的关键项目清单。事故范围缩小到基本关键 1 和 1R，其故障可能导致人员伤亡和车辆损失。管理层应该在关键 1 项的情况下得到通知，并且他们可能由于延迟或限制启动而导致，直到该项目被审查并确定不会出现问题。
因此，当管理人员在时间压力下忽视工程师对 O 型圈性能的担忧时，就会出现集体思维，部分原因是压力大，需要让公司及时努力（Janis，1982）。 Thiokol 的工程师已经注意到这个问题并通知了高层管理人员。它是关于不确定性下的非理性决策，需要取悦利益相关者而不是误传。
The several symptoms of groupthink came into play including the illusion of invulnerability and the illusion of morality that reflect overconfidence.
When the concern about the O-ring was raised, the manager saw it as usual in every flight they previously had. There were previous damages O-ring, but there was never a severe fatality from it. This led to overconfidence in managers. Also, the managers wanted to prove that the launch would be unsafe instead of the other way around. They shifted the moral rules under which they operate. Since they were overconfidence with previous flights, manager aimed to prove failure of the shuttle instead of its success.
Moreover, the other two symptoms depicted tunnel vision. NASA manager noted that there is a second O-ring to cover the first in a worst-case scenario. This gives the third symptom of collective rationalization. There was a misconception that the failure of the first one, the second ring would cover it. It was regardless that O-ring is part of critical item 1. Most importantly, the fourth symptom was stereotype in which manager looked down on Thiokol engineers. They saw them as perfectionist rather than risk-takers.
Furthermore, he depicted conformity under group pressure. 数字技术商科代写
George Hardy showed self-censorship when he intended to hold the launch but withheld his position. The silent in the group members was taken as unanimous agreement to a decision. It was later established that NASA managers did not inform administrators of the engineers’ concerns, and hence flight readiness review team assumed the silence as agreement. Also evident was direct pressure to conform to Thiokol engineers and not to recommend postponement.
The engineers wanted to please NASA managers and were looking forward to future contracts and hence did not want to disappoint. NASA, on the other hand, had already made three postponements and did not want the fourth one, which they feared would display their incompetence to American public. The managers were also under pressure to please the White House for future funding on space flights. Unfortunately, the astronauts were not part of decision-making process, and hence lives were not part of the flight considerations. There existed a mind guards to protect them from information and avoid complacency. Roger Boisjoly was an expert in O-rings but was not given a chance in decision making.
In summary, the Challenger disaster is a perfect example of groupthink and its negative impacts. There is a need for group members to share ideas at all costs and be given a chance to express dissent. However, negative groupthink distances members from their expression abilities, which could improve the overall outcome of the group. Therefore, striving to preserve cohesion in the group result in poor decisions being made.
译文：
群体思维的几个症状开始发挥作用，包括无懈可击的错觉和反映过度自信的道德错觉。 数字技术商科代写
当提出对 O 形圈的担忧时，经理在他们以前的每次飞行中都像往常一样看到了它。以前有损坏 O 形圈，但从未有过严重的死亡事故。这导致了对管理者的过度自信。此外，管理人员想证明发射是不安全的，而不是相反。他们改变了他们运作的道德规则。由于他们对之前的飞行过于自信，经理旨在证明航天飞机的失败而不是它的成功。
此外，另外两个症状描述了隧道视觉。 NASA 经理指出，在最坏的情况下，还有第二个 O 形环可以覆盖第一个。这给出了集体合理化的第三个症状。有一种误解，认为第一个环的失败，第二个环会覆盖它。无论如何，O 形圈是关键项目 1 的一部分。最重要的是，第四个症状是经理看不起 Thiokol 工程师的刻板印象。他们认为他们是完美主义者而不是冒险者。
此外，他描绘了群体压力下的从众。 数字技术商科代写
乔治·哈迪 (George Hardy) 在打算举行发射但隐瞒自己的职位时表现出自我审查。小组成员的沉默被视为一致同意决定。后来确定 NASA 管理人员没有将工程师的担忧告知管理员，因此飞行准备审查小组将沉默视为同意。同样明显的是直接压力符合 Thiokol 工程师的要求，而不是建议推迟。
工程师们想要取悦 NASA 的管理人员并期待未来的合同，因此不想让人失望。另一方面，美国宇航局已经进行了三次推迟，并且不想要第四次推迟，他们担心这会向美国公众展示他们的无能。管理人员还面临着取悦白宫未来太空飞行资金的压力。不幸的是，宇航员不是决策过程的一部分，因此生命不是飞行考虑的一部分。有一个精神卫士来保护他们免受信息的影响并避免自满。 Roger Boisjoly 是 O 型圈方面的专家，但没有机会做出决策。
总之，挑战者号灾难是集体思维及其负面影响的完美例子。小组成员需要不惜一切代价分享想法，并有机会表达不同意见。然而，消极的群体思维使成员远离他们的表达能力，这可以改善群体的整体结果。因此，努力保持团队的凝聚力会导致做出错误的决定。
Conclusion and Recommendation
In summation, through various kinds of literature and experiments, it is clear that groupthink has both positive and negative impacts on the organization. Workplace diversity, especially in the global market, also contributes immensely to the emergence of groupthink. Additionally, digital technology has played a crucial role in organizational communication through which a group mentality occurs. Technology has been used to mediate interpersonal corporate interactions.
However, mediation can increase the distance between various individuals in the group, particularly isolate the senior management. In the absence of control, interpersonal and motivation, the development of negative groupthink is inevitable. As such, in modern business there is a connection between organizational communication and emergence of groupthink in which digital technology plays the role of mediation.
Besides, the pieces of literature reveal that herd mentality leads to irrational decisions for fear of intimidation and stereotypes as well as trying to conform and maintain coherence by individual group members.
Therefore, global managers should strive to maintain a positive group mentality where loyalty is for the company objectives rather than individuals. They should learn that negative herd mentality occurs due to poor management practices such as laissez-faire leadership behaviour. However, empirical research is required in real business scenarios to test modern groupthink and the contribution of technology in it.
The research should further establish more attributes of the theory and how exactly it impacts on global businesses. The new studies should also focus on testing tools for the approach, together with factors that contribute to the effectiveness of groupthink. As noted by Janis (1972), group mentality can bring worse or the best to the business organization. This paper has demonstrated the impact of groupthink in modern businesses and the role of digital technology as the mediating factor.
译文：
结论和建议 数字技术商科代写
总之，通过各种文献和实验，很明显群体思维对组织既有正面影响，也有负面影响。工作场所的多样性，尤其是在全球市场，也极大地促进了群体思维的出现。此外，数字技术在组织沟通中发挥了至关重要的作用，通过这种沟通可以产生群体心态。技术已被用于调解人际企业互动。
然而，调解会拉大群体中不同个体之间的距离，尤其是孤立高层管理人员。在缺乏控制、人际关系和动机的情况下，消极群体思维的发展是不可避免的。因此，在现代商业中，组织沟通与群体思维的出现之间存在联系，其中数字技术起着中介作用。
此外，文献表明，从众心理会导致害怕恐吓和陈规定型观念的非理性决策，以及试图遵守和保持个体群体成员的一致性。
因此，全球经理应该努力保持积极的集体心态，忠诚是为了公司目标而不是个人。他们应该了解消极的从众心态是由于管理不善造成的，例如自由放任的领导行为。然而，需要在实际业务场景中进行实证研究来检验现代群体思维及其技术的贡献。
该研究应进一步确定该理论的更多属性以及它究竟如何影响全球企业。新研究还应侧重于该方法的测试工具，以及有助于群体思维有效性的因素。正如 Janis (1972) 所指出的，群体心态可以给商业组织带来更糟或最好的结果。本文展示了群体思维对现代企业的影响以及数字技术作为中介因素的作用。
References 数字技术商科代写
Byun, S. E., & Mann, M. (2011). The influence of others: The impact of perceived human crowding on perceived competition, emotions, and hedonic shopping value. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 29(4), 284-297.
Berger, M. (2010). Making waves or keeping calm? Analyzing the institutional culture of family courts through the lens of social psychology Groupthink theory. Law & Psychology Review, 34, 55-90. Retrieved from http://www.law.ua.edu/lawpsychology/
Caulfield, P. & Smith, N. (2009). If you ask me. Engineering & Technology, 4(7), 16. doi: 10.1049/et.2009.0724.
Corum, J. (2009). Future battlespace and the US response. Baltic Security & Defence Review, 11(2), 21-39. Retrieved from http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital Library/Publications/Detail/?lng=en&id=15535
Cardon, P. W., & Marshall, B. (2015). The hype and reality of social media use for work collaboration and team communication. International Journal of Business Communication, 52(3), 273-293.
Esser, F. (2013). The emerging paradigm of comparative communication inquiry: Advancing cross-national research in times of globalization. International Journal of Communication, 7(2), 113-128.
Greig, J. M. (2002). The end of geography? Globalization, communications, and culture in the international system. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46(2), 225-243.
Griffin, F. (n.d). The groupthink of Irving Janis. In A First Look at Commission Theory (Chapter 18). Retrieved from https://www.afirstlook.com/
Heinemann, G. & Farrell, M. (1994). Groupthink theory and research: implications for decision making in geriatric health care teams. Educational Gerontology, 20(1), 71-85. Retrieved from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/tf/03601277.html
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascos. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kim, A., Kim, Y., Han, K., Jackson, S. E., & Ployhart, R. E. (2017). Multilevel influences on voluntary workplace green behaviour: Individual differences, leader behaviour, and coworker advocacy. Journal of Management, 43(5), 1335-1358.
Meyers, E. (2010). Mediating group search: Lessons from a middle school study. The article, 38(2). Retrieved from web.ebscohost.com
and
Morgan, S. J., & Symon, G. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and remote management: integration or isolation? Social Science Computer Review, 20(3), 302-311.
Neuliep, J. (2019). Anxiety, Uncertainty, and Intercultural Communication. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication.
Pautz, J. A., & Forrer, D. A. (2013). The dynamics of groupthink: The cape coral experience. Journal of International Energy Policy, 2(1), 1.
Rose, J. (2011). Diverse perspectives on the Groupthink theory – a literary review. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 4(1), 37-57. Retrieved from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/elj/vol4iss1/Rose_V4I1_pp37-57.pdf
Schmidmeier, J., & Takahashi, A. R. W. (2018). Group intercultural competence: proposing a concept. Cadernos EBAPE. BR, 16(1), 135-151.
Solomon, M. (2006). Groupthink versus the wisdom of crowds: the social epistemology of deliberation and dissent. Southern Journal of Philosophy, 44(1), 28-42. doi: 10.1111/j.2041-6962.2006.tb00028.x.
Singh, A. K. (2014). Role of interpersonal communication in organizational effectiveness. International Journal of Research in Management and Business Studies (IJRMBS), 1(4).
Scharff, M. M. (2005). Understanding WorldCom’s accounting fraud: Did groupthink play a role?. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 11(3), 109-118.
Torney, C. J., Lorenzi, T., Couzin, I. D., & Levin, S. A. (2015). Social information use and the evolution of unresponsiveness in collective systems. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 12(103), 20140893.
Westerman, G., & Bonnet, D. (2015). Revamping your business through digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56(3), 10.
其他代写：essay代写 app代写 assembly代写 CS代写 assignment代写 homework代写 Exercise代写 C++代写 C/C++代写 algorithm代写 analysis代写 code代写 course代写 Data Analysis代写 data代写
