Question

What is the difference between group polarization and group think? What are the dangers of each? Give an example of how these concepts may look in an organizational setting?

Answer 1

Groupthink is a mental marvel that happens inside a group of individuals, in which the want for agreement or similarity in the group brings about an unreasonable or broken basic leadership result.

Group individuals endeavor to limit struggle and achieve an agreement choice without basic assessment of elective perspectives, by currently smothering contradicting perspectives, and by secluding themselves from outside impacts.

Group polarization alludes to the propensity for groups to settle on choices that are more extraordinary than the underlying slant of its individuals.

These more outrageous choices are towards more serious hazard if people's underlying propensities are to be hazardous and towards more noteworthy alert if people's underlying inclinations are to be mindful.

Disadvantages of group think -

Some subjective inclinations are intensified in group settings e.g. the affirmation inclination (winged animals of a similar quill run together; all the similarly invested individuals from the group can intensify each other's affirmation). Also a portion of the inclinations are entirely group-predispositions i.e., they exist just in group settings e.g. the in-group predisposition (this can be especially huge when the exchange includes a contradicting gathering or idea).Groupthink can prompt one-sided choices. Such choices can be more about agreement than comprehension. Yet, an agreement does not suggest truth, close to it inferred so when everybody trusted the earth was level.

Disadvantage of group polarization

Group polarization is another potential disadvantage of group basic leadership. This is the propensity of the group to merge on more outrageous answers for an issue. The "dangerous move" marvel is a case of polarization; it happens when the group choice is a more dangerous one than any of the group individuals would have made independently. This may come about on the grounds that people in a group once in a while don't feel as much obligation and responsibility for the activities of the group as they would in the event that they were settling on the choice alone.