It was interesting to read about groupthink. Normally, I would think that the more people you have, the better the decision will be, because there are more opinions and expertise available. However, that does not work when there is a cohesive group, because the decision making process can easily fall into groupthink and have disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n
One of the interesting points in the reading was the comparison of the Bay of Pigs and how it led to groupthink, because it was dominated by consensus and there was no real challenge to the intelligence of the CIA. However, Janis pointed out that the Cuban Missile Crisis was handled extremely well by the same administration. It was interesting to look for parallels between the reading and Thirteen Days<\/em> to see how the situation did not fall into groupthink. The major reason that I saw was Kennedy\u2019s resilience against the single-minded view of the chiefs to go to war. Kennedy forced many people to come up with alternative opinions that would not drive the US to war.<\/p>\n Overall, I think it is important not to fall into the belief that good decisions will be made simply because there is a consensus on an issue or \u2018experts\u2019 agree on it. It\u2019s necessary for any democracy constantly challenge its ideas and policies to make sure they are the best possible decision rather than one made through groupthink.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" It was interesting to read about groupthink. Normally, I would think that the more people you have, the better the decision will be, because there…<\/p>\n