Managing Dissent Risk

Over time, the quality of a group's decisions depends on how the group handles dissent. Some groups regard dissent as an annoying obstacle to overcome. And once these groups overcome dissent, some of them regard the views of dissenters as views to be suppressed. Some even eject repeat dissenters. The actions of these groups expose them to risks that arise from excessively narrow perspectives about the issues they face. If, ultimately, events expose weaknesses in the majority's views, dissent-intolerant groups can find their ideological resources so impoverished that they cannot respond effectively to those events.

The effect is most pronounced when the issues in question are difficult to resolve on objective grounds, because the group cannot be certain that the majority perspective is complete and correct. In these situations, there is a nonzero probability that the majority is overlooking some important issues, or that it isn't weighing some issues appropriately. Rejecting the views of dissenters, and obliterating their views from the record, reduces the group's ideological diversity, which can prevent the group from accessing the benefits that arise from taking dissenters' views into account, even retrospectively.

These considerations are most important when they apply to decisions that have long-lasting effects or substantial impact on resources. For such decisions we can manage this "dissent risk" by recording the views of dissenters. Not their identities — their views. That practice has benefits and risks. Let's begin with the benefits.

Dissenters feel heard

Dissenters who feelFor its own wellbeing, keeping
dissent alive and vital is
the task and responsibility
of the majority heard are less likely to become cynical about the decision process. A faithful record of a dissenter's view on an issue is objective evidence that the majority has heard the dissent.

The majority is more likely to take account of dissenters' views

Because there is a record of the dissenters' views, any lurking doubt on the part of the majority about the rightness of their own views provides motivation to make adjustments to take account of the dissenters' views.

Dissent quality improves

Aware that their views will be recorded, dissenters become more motivated to express their views cogently and without rancor. This approach inherently makes their views more credible and persuasive.

Spurious dissent is discouraged

Recording their views discourages dissenters from expressing views that are insubstantial, because the record can make spurious dissent obvious, especially if the dissents are part of a pattern.

Recording dissents helps the group learn

Most important, the record of dissents enables the group as a whole to learn from its mistakes. When it reaches decisions that prove mistaken, and a recorded dissent demonstrates that the group could have adopted a more productive path, the group can explore possible causes of its error. That exploration can lead to learning.

And there are some risks.

I-told-you-so

The practice of recording dissent can seem to some to be a plan for a later I-told-you-so revengeful attack on the majority. Dissenters who use the record in that way must recognize that such actions would be used as a basis for halting the practice of recording dissents. To mitigate this risk, groups adopting the practice can establish a norm that makes clear that using the record for I-told-you-so attacks is inappropriate.

Encouraging malice

There is a risk that the existence of a record can encourage dissents that lack real merit, by people who seek only long-shot opportunities to be right when everyone else is wrong. However, the record itself mitigates this risk, because the record can expose patterns of long-shot dissents.

Ambiguity of the record

If the dissent record is insufficiently clear, a decision failure can lead to incorrect conclusions regarding the merits of the dissent, or dissenters can claim "credit" when credit isn't really due. To mitigate this risk, write clear summaries of dissenters' views, and subject them to review by the dissenters.

Success in adopting the practice of faithfully recording dissents from important decisions does have a "price of admission." The group must acknowledge that dissent doesn't cause failure. Absent this understanding, the record of dissents can be used to make dissenters into pariahs. When that happens, we're back where we started — people withhold their dissents, and decision quality suffers.  Top    Next Issue

Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Conflict Management:

Conflict Haiku

When tempers flare, or tension fills the air, many of us contribute to the stew, often without realizing that we do. Here are some haiku that describe some of the many stances we choose that can lead groups into tangles, or let those tangles persist once they form.

Responding to Threats: III

Workplace threats come in a variety of flavors. One class of threats is indirect. Threateners who use the indirect threats aim to evoke fear of consequences brought about not by the threatener, but by other parties. Indirect threats are indeed warnings, but not in the way you might think.

OODA at Work

OODA is a model of decision making that's especially useful in rapidly evolving environments, such as combat, marketing, politics, and emergency management. Here's a brief overview.

Conversation Irritants: II

Workplace conversation is difficult enough, because of stress, time pressure, and the complexity of our discussions. But it's even more vexing when people actually try to be nasty, unclear, and ambiguous. Here's Part II of a small collection of their techniques.

Fear/Anxiety Bias: II

When people sense that reporting the true status of the work underway could be career-dangerous, some shade or "spin" their reports. Managers then receive an inaccurate impression of the state of the organization. Here are five of the patterns people use.

See also Conflict Management and Critical Thinking at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming July 3: Additive bias…or Not: II

Additive bias is a cognitive bias that many believe contributes to bloat of commercial products. When we change products to make them more capable, additive bias might not play a role, because economic considerations sometimes favor additive approaches. Available here and by RSS on July 3.

And on July 10: On Delegating Accountability: I

As the saying goes, "You can't delegate your own accountability." Despite wide knowledge of this aphorism, people try it from time to time, especially when overcome by the temptation of a high-risk decision. What can you delegate, and how can you do it? Available here and by RSS on July 10.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info