Techniques for Managing Groupthink in Negotiation

Ever been in a meeting where everyone seems to agree… but something feels off? Then the meeting ends, and someone turns to you and says, “I don’t actually think that plan is going to work.” That’s the problem with passive consensus. It drains momentum and buries the truth. One of the simplest High Return Practices we teach in Never Lead Alone is the Candor Break. It’s a pause button for honesty. In the middle of a conversation, especially one that feels like it’s drifting toward groupthink, ask this one question: “What’s not being said right now that really should be?” Then have people pair up or break into small groups to answer it, capture the insights in a shared doc, return to the main room and share back. It’s as easy as that. It takes 5 minutes and it changes everything.

The most dangerous thing in a meeting isn’t a heated debate—it’s silence with a fake nod. In low trust teams, they don’t speak up in meetings, then vent in private. They smile at the plan, but quietly ignore it. They avoid conflict, and call it being “a team player.” The best teams? They debate. They challenge (the ideas) They raise their hand and say, “I see it differently and here’s why.” Because real alignment only comes after real conflict. If your team never disagrees, they’re not aligned—they’re avoiding. So, what do you do? 1️⃣ In decision-making meetings, try designating someone to challenge the prevailing view—even if they agree with it. It normalizes dissent. It protects the team from groupthink. And it gives quiet voices permission to speak truth without fear. Because when conflict is expected, it becomes productive. 2️⃣ Ask each person privately: “What’s one thing you think but haven’t said out loud in our meetings?” Then just listen. No defending. No fixing. When people feel heard without punishment, trust starts to grow. Invite them to share more of those views in group settings. And when they do, welcome it. Say, “This may feel uncomfortable for some of you, but I want us all to welcome more debates over ideas. It’s not me vs you, but me and you vs the problem.” If they still aren’t voicing dissent in team meetings, it may not be that they don’t care— but because they don’t feel safe. Then try going first and modeling the behavior you want with vulnerability. In your next meeting, say: “Here’s where I might have dropped the ball. What am I not seeing?” Or, “Here’s where I might be wrong. What am I missing?” Vulnerability builds trust. And trust invites truth. And when disagreement is safe, alignment gets real. How do you build a culture of healthy conflict over ideas?

Obviously the first line is the shortest. What??! You don’t think so? Guess what, even though you are right, if you were in a room with 3 other people who confidently stated that the first line is the shortest, there’s a 75% chance you would agree with them. “Not me!” you may say to yourself. But study after study says that all of us are likely to fall into the trap of Groupthink under the right conditions. We are wired for social connection and for the safety that belonging to a group provides us. While individualistic societies offer the allure of personal freedom and autonomous decision-making, it can quickly become smoke and mirrors as our brains move toward consensus with the groups we are part of. In a 1972 study by Irving Janis looking at foreign policy decisions, he discovered that even the most senior and accomplished of advisors–prized for their strategic thinking, “backbone”, and sense of responsibility to keep the country safe–were not immune to this. “In the Bay of Pigs Invasion, Janis discovered, the problem was that although Kennedy’s advisors had good reason to think the mission would fail, they never voiced these concerns. Although they harbored private doubts, they ‘never pressed, partly out of a fear of being labeled ‘soft’ or undaring in the eyes of their colleagues.’ “ I have worked in places where I observed this happening. I have been captured by it myself. As leaders, we can avoid this trap by: ➤ Soliciting individual’s thoughts privately before going into a group environment. ➤ Recognizing the unique value and perspective each person brings and asking them to share it specifically (e.g. “You are very knowledgeable about finances. I would love your opinion on how this decision would impact us financially.”) ➤ Asking everyone to give contrarian responses–and even be creative about it. (e.g. “We’ve all said C is our best option. Now, I want everyone to come up with a reason why it is not”). So, tell me, which line is really the shortest?