The Abilene Paradox: Navigating Groupthink in Decision-Making
When consensus leads us astray, it's time to challenge the status quo.
You are sitting on the porch of your house in Coleman, Texas, with your in-laws on a hot Sunday afternoon in 1974 when your father-in-law suggests driving to the nearby town of Abilene for the evening. Abilene is fifty-three miles away, it's hot, and the 1958 Buick has no air conditioning.
What are you doing?
You will likely try a diplomatic tactic similar to Jerry B. Harvey's. Since his wife seemed to like the idea, Harvey also signaled his interest: "Sounds good to me. I hope your mother wants to go too." He was secretly hoping that his mother-in-law would find the journey too arduous. Much to his regret, she also liked the idea. So they set off.
As expected, the journey was tedious; there was a sandstorm on the way, and the food was, unfortunately, terrible. Four hours later, the family returned to the veranda, downright exhausted. Out of kindness, Harvey nevertheless described the trip as "great," whereupon the father-in-law confessed that he would have preferred to stay at home. In the heated discussion that followed, all four realized that none of them had wanted to go.
A group of people does not automatically make good decisions. Without sufficient psychological safety, they lack radical candor and transparency (Scott, 2019), which would have led to a better decision on that Sunday afternoon. This Abilene Paradox (Harvey, 1974) provides a plausible explanation for this pithy and sobering summary of organizational dysfunction: a camel is a horse designed by a committee.
That is why Alfred Sloan demanded open debate. He reportedly said in a meeting of a top committee, "Gentlemen, I take it we are all in complete agreement on the decision here." Everyone around the table nodded assent. "Then," continued Mr. Sloan, "I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about." (Drucker, 1967, 148)
Alfred Sloan delivered a great example of embracing "diversity and dissent over conformity and consensus," one of the six theses in my Manifesto for Humane Leadership. That's why I demand and encourage more rebelliousness and why, as an agile coach, I occasionally refer to myself as a corporate jester. Change requires disturbance—well-dosed and well-thought-out, but still disturbance.
However, without psychological safety, we all sweat unnecessarily on the drive to Abilene or happily design camels in the air-conditioned meeting room.
References
Drucker, P. F. (1967). The effective executive: the definitive guide to getting the right things done (repr.). Harper.
Harvey, J. B. (1974). The abilene paradox: The management of agreement. Organizational Dynamics, 3(1), 63–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(74)90005-9
Scott, K. (2019). Radical candor: be a kick-ass boss without losing your humanity (Fully revised & updated edition). St. Martin's Press.
This newsletter is a personal project driven by my passion for agile methodologies and leadership. I believe we need to transform our organizations into more humane environments. I have been fortunate to sustain this initiative through the sales of my books in both German and English, as well as through the generous donations of my audience, for which I am incredibly grateful. If you would like to support Lead Like a Gardener and help it continue thriving without any ads, please consider making a small donation.
Donate Here → https://buymeacoffee.com/marcusraitner
Find more inspiration in my recently published "Manifesto for Humane Leadership." Check it out on Leanpub.
