In Defense of Troublemakers : The Power of Dissent in Life and Business

We have decided by consensus that consensus is good: in the boardroom and the halls of government, in the jury box and the corner bar, we value reaching agreement. Unfortunately, although the wisdom of crowds might be a good way to answer trivia questions, the truth is not as democratic as we might like to believe. Group decision-making often allows widely held assumptions to go unchallenged in favor of harmony and cohesiveness. Agreement can lead to disastrous consequences: flights crash because the crew is afraid to speak up, and surgical teams make lethal errors because they mistake acquiescence for accuracy. In the name of comity, we end up embracing stupidity. Even worse, we punish those who refuse to go along. In In Defense of Troublemakers, social psychologist Charlan Nemeth argues that we can make better decisions by encouraging dissent. Dissent forces us to question the status quo and rethink our preconceptions. When dissenters challenge majority opinion, they force the majority to seek information on all sides of the issue and consider new ideas. Indeed, dissent enables more creative, and better, decision-making. Perhaps most remarkably, dissent doesn't have to be correct in order to be effective. Objectors bring groups far closer to truth, regardless of whether they themselves are right or wrong. It is no easy task to be the lone voice calling in the wilderness, and it is difficult for many to accept criticism or tolerate disagreement. But when we encourage dissent, we're not just empowering others, we're empowering ourselves. In Defense of Troublemakers is essential reading for anyone who works in groups and wants them to work better. -- From dust jacket. An eminent psychologist explains why dissent should be cherished, not feared We've decided by consensus that consensus is good. In In Defense of Troublemakers , psychologist Charlan Nemeth argues that this principle is completely wrong: left unchallenged, the majority opinion is often biased, unoriginal, or false. It leads planes and markets to crash, causes juries to convict innocent people, and can quite literally make people think blue is green. In the name of comity, we embrace stupidity. We can make better decisions by embracing dissent. Dissent forces us to question the status quo, consider more information, and engage in creative decision-making. From Twelve Angry Men to Edward Snowden, lone objectors who make people question their assumptions bring groups far closer to truth — regardless of whether they are right or wrong. Essential reading for anyone who works in groups, In Defense of Troublemakers will radically change the way you think, listen, and make decisions. An eminent psychologist explains why dissent should be cherished, not feared We've decided by consensus that consensus is good. In In Defense of Troublemakers , psychologist Charlan Jeanne Nemeth argues that this principle is completely wrong: left unchallenged, the majority opinion is often biased, unoriginal, or false. It leads planes and markets to crash, causes juries to convict innocent people, and can quite literally make people think blue is green. In the name of comity, we embrace stupidity. We can make better decisions by embracing dissent. Dissent forces us to question the status quo, consider more information, and engage in creative decision-making. From Twelve Angry Men to Edward Snowden, lone objectors who make people question their assumptions bring groups far closer to truth—regardless of whether they are right or wrong. Essential reading for anyone who works in groups, In Defense of Troublemakers will radically change... Introduction: fear consensus love dissent -- Majorities versus troublemakers: the art of persuasion -- Numbers rule -- Even one dissenter makes a difference -- Dissent as an art in changing hearts and minds -- Consensus versus dissent: consensus closes the mind but dissent opens the mind -- Consensus narrows thinking and kills rationality -- Dissent diversifies and strengthens thinking -- Groupthink versus groups of thinkers: groups often make terrible decisions, but can make better ones when we encourage discussion and dissent -- Group decisions: often in error never in doubt -- Diversity and devil's advocates -- Conclusions -- Acknowledgments -- Notes -- Index Introduction: Fear consensus, love dissent -- Part I. Majorities versus troublemakers: the art of persuasion : Numbers rule -- Even one dissenter makes a difference -- Dissent as an art in changing hearts and minds -- Part II. Consensus versus dissent: closed minds versus open minds : Consensus narrows thinking, and kills rationality -- Dissent diversifies, and strengthens thinking -- Part III. Groupthink versus groups of thinkers : Group decisions: often in error, never in doubt -- Better decisions: dissent, diversity, and devil's advocates -- Conclusions.