Don’t Let Bias Hijack Your Brainstorms: How to Take Back Control
Workshops can be incredible spaces for innovation, but they’re also prone to biases that can derail. As a facilitator, it's crucial to spot them, and steer the group back on course.
Over the past 20 years, I’ve facilitated hundreds of workshops and focus groups, helping teams across diverse industries unlock their potential. From Fortune 500 companies to innovative startups, my experience has shown me the power of good facilitation as a change-driver. Through these sessions, I’ve witnessed firsthand the common biases that can interfere with group decision-making. Understanding and addressing these biases is crucial for any facilitator looking to create an environment where creativity and critical thinking thrive. Here are a few insights and strategies to help you navigate these challenges and raise the bar on your own workshops.
Let’s dive into some of the most common biases in group decision-making and explore how you can tackle them head-on.
Biases of Influence
As social animals, we are driven by a need to be accepted because our survival as a species depended on it. As such, we can let the perceived will of the group or a figure of authority overtake our own desires, opinions, or concerns in decision-making in favor of conformity. This can lead to more extreme or polarized outcomes and inhibit divergent thinking.
Groupthink
This happens when the group’s desire for harmony or conformity results in irrational decisions. People might hold back their true thoughts, leading to a lack of critical evaluation of alternatives. Members often suppress dissenting opinions and fail to consider all options thoroughly.
What Causes It: Groupthink can arise from a strong desire to maintain group cohesion and avoid conflict. It is often driven by the fear of isolation or rejection by the group. When there is a dominant leader or a homogenous group, members might feel pressured to conform.
How to Overcome It:
● Encourage Open Dialogue: Make it clear that all opinions are valued. Techniques like anonymous feedback or assigning a devil’s advocate can help ensure all viewpoints are heard.
● Devil’s Advocate: Have someone take the role of intentionally challenging ideas to spark critical thinking.
● Break into Smaller Groups: Small teams can discuss issues independently before sharing with the larger group, reducing conformity pressure.
Authority Bias
Group members might defer to perceived leaders or experts, even when better ideas are on the table. The influence of authority figures can overshadow more innovative or practical suggestions from other group members.
What Causes It: Authority bias often stems from the hierarchical structure within a group. When leaders or experts dominate the discussion, their opinions can be seen as more valuable or correct, leading others to suppress their own ideas.
How to Overcome It:
● Equalize Participation: Make sure everyone gets a turn to speak. Round-robin techniques can ensure balanced participation.
● Use Anonymous Voting: Gather opinions through anonymous votes or surveys to minimize the influence of authority figures.
Polarization Effect
Group discussions can sometimes lead to more extreme positions than individuals originally held, as members reinforce each other’s viewpoints. This can escalate into radicalized decisions that might not be the most balanced or practical.
What Causes It: Polarization occurs when like-minded individuals discuss an issue, leading to reinforcement of their shared views and dismissal of opposing perspectives. This dynamic is often fueled by social comparison and the desire to be seen as committed to the group’s cause.
How to Overcome It:
● Seek Diverse Opinions: Bring in external experts or stakeholders to provide different perspectives.
● Encourage Critical Thinking: Ask questions that make the group consider the pros and cons of their positions. Make space for counter arguments and different angles.
Experiential Biases
Sometimes our lived experiences can become a barrier to good decision-making. When we are overly focused on belonging to or the opinions of a social group, an us vs them mentality can take over. We can assume that someone else in a large group will act, or that a past decision necessitates a continuation of the same.
In-group Bias
This bias surfaces when people favor the ideas of those within their group and dismiss outside perspectives. It can limit the diversity of thought and stifle innovative solutions by prioritizing familiarity over novelty.
What Causes It: In-group bias is driven by a sense of belonging and loyalty to one’s group. This can create an “us versus them” mentality, where ideas from within the group are favored over those from outsiders.
How to Overcome It:
● Promote Inclusivity: Include participants from different departments, backgrounds, and levels within the organization.
● Rotate Group Membership: Change up group compositions regularly to ensure a mix of perspectives.
Social Loafing
Individuals may put in less effort when working in a group compared to working alone, leading to lower overall performance. This can happen when individuals feel their contributions are less visible or less impactful in a group setting.
What Causes It: Social loafing occurs when individuals feel less accountable in a group setting. The diffusion of responsibility can lead members to believe that others will pick up the slack, reducing their own effort.
How to Overcome It:
● Set Clear Expectations: Define roles and responsibilities clearly so everyone knows their contributions matter.
● Implement Accountability Mechanisms: Use progress tracking or peer evaluations to keep everyone engaged and accountable.
Sunk Cost Fallacy
Groups may continue to invest in a decision based on past investments rather than current merits or future benefits. This can lead to throwing good money after bad, perpetuating ineffective strategies simply because of the resources already spent.
What Causes It: The sunk cost fallacy arises from a desire to justify past investments. Group members may feel committed to a decision because of the time, money, or effort already expended, even when it no longer makes sense.
How to Overcome It:
● Focus on Future Benefits: Encourage the group to consider future outcomes instead of past investments.
● Encourage Re-evaluation: Regularly reassess ongoing projects with a fresh perspective, focusing on future returns.
Biases of Information
The inputs we choose in the decision-making process itself can become a form of bias. Whether we latch onto the first or last data point presented and ignore everything else, or implicitly seek information that confirms our own beliefs, we can predetermine results.
Confirmation Bias
Group members might favor information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs, leading to a narrow view and poor decisions. This bias can cause the group to overlook critical information that contradicts their initial assumptions.
What Causes It: Confirmation bias is driven by the tendency to seek out information that supports existing beliefs and to ignore or downplay contradictory evidence. This can be exacerbated by group dynamics where members reinforce each other’s views.
How to Overcome It:
● Present Contradictory Evidence: Actively seek and present information that challenges the group’s assumptions.
● Encourage Debate: Foster a culture where differing opinions are discussed openly and respectfully.
Availability Heuristic
Decisions might be influenced by the most readily available or recent information, rather than all relevant data. This can lead to an overestimation of the importance of recent events or information that is easier to recall.
What Causes It: The availability heuristic is caused by the tendency to rely on information that comes to mind quickly and easily. This can be influenced by recent experiences, media coverage, or personal anecdotes, leading to skewed perceptions.
How to Overcome It:
● Diversify Information Sources: Use a wide range of data sources to inform decisions. Encourage participants to bring different pieces of information to the table.
● Time for Reflection: Allow time for reflection and additional research before finalizing decisions to ensure all relevant information is considered.
Don’t let biases hijack your workshops—take control. By recognizing these common biases and deploying strategies to counteract them, you can bring a better brainstorm together. No longer will groupthink, authority bias, or polarization sabotage your sessions. Instead, you’ll be able to create a vibrant, inclusive environment that not only sparks individual creativity but also forges stronger teams.
Sara Macfarlane is a Social Psychologist, Market Researcher, Brand Strategist, Planner, CMO-At-Large, Founder, and Wayfinder with The Navigator Collective. Studying humans in all their beauty and complexity first through the lens of academics, then marketing research, and ultimately branding and creative planning, her work informs a deeper relationship between brand and audience in whatever form that may take. Regardless of the objective at hand, there is always a core truth driving behavior that will meet constituent needs, provide value, and result in a mutually beneficial relationship between brands and their communities. Sara has worked for not-for-profits, governments, travel and tourism, education, retail, fashion, automotive, fin-tech, education, sports, technology, and everything in-between. She loves her work, and it shows.
