How can you prevent groupthink?

Agreement is not an independent test

The Challenger inquiry describes a decision made without the full engineering objections. It found incomplete and sometimes misleading information and conflict between engineering evidence and management judgment. Calling that 'groupthink' does not explain the process failure.¹

Chapter 12 asks what a room does with doubt. I want the strongest objection recorded in language its holder recognizes, not softened until everyone can sign it.

Make dissent usable

AHRQ's huddle guidance lets any team member raise a change requiring a plan adjustment. Its healthcare context matters. Applying it elsewhere is my suggestion, not a proven universal treatment for groupthink.²

I would collect written assessments before discussion, let the leader speak after evidence is heard and record what remains uncertain. The aim is a better decision, not manufactured conflict.

Why do smart people make bad decisions together?

Expertise does not ensure relevant information reaches the final decision. Challenger shows how objections and engineering history can be lost within a competent organization. Fix the route of the evidence rather than insulting the intelligence of the people involved.¹