Blind spots in the boardroom and beyond

'If 50 million people say something foolish, it is still foolish.'

--Somerset Maugham THE recent presidential debate was a masterclass in groupthink. Each side, trapped in their echo chamber, ignored glaring flaws and doubled down on their candidate's shortcomings. One side spewed falsehoods, cheered on by their own. The other faltered and floundered, yet his team denied anything was wrong with the boss. This isn't just politics; it's a disease infecting organisations worldwide, where consensus is mistaken for correctness, and the boss knows all.

Instead of acknowledging flaws, the debate turned into a partisan water- pistol slinging match, ignoring intellect and ideas. Where were Biden's advisers to confront their own team?

Alignment ≠ good teamwork

Groupthink is the boardroom's version of the 'Emperor's New Clothes'. Everyone nods along, ignoring the naked truth, creating a false consensus and sacrificing critical thinking at the altar of conformity. If you don't rock the boat, you don't risk being excluded from the 'club'.

The wreckage of groupthink

The NHS Infected Blood Scan -

dal: Thousands infected due to con taminated blood, where, despite early warnings, authorities ignored dissenting voices at the expense of patient safety.

The UK Post Office Horizon Scandal: Hundreds wrongly accused due to a faulty IT system, leadership stubbornly defended its accuracy, suppressing dissent and perpetuating grave injustices caused by blind faith and groupthink.

The 2008 financial crisis: A col lective delusion about housing market stability where financial institutions, rating agencies, and regulators ignored warnings and engaged in reckless practices, leading to a global economic meltdown.

Boeing's Downfall: Concerns about the 737 MAX's design were dismissed in the rush to compete with Airbus-this collective denial ignored potential risks, with initial blame placed on non-American pi lots, reflecting a dangerous presumption of superiority, where dissenting voices are stifled, and diverse expertise is ignored.

Enron, Swissair, the Challeng - er Disaster, the Bay of Pigs: Each a monument to the dangers of ignoring dissent and embracing collective delusion.

I'm the boss so I must be right. Right?

This dangerous assumption cre ates a cone of silence around dissenting voices. No one wants to be the lone voice in the wilderness, especially when differing views are actively suppressed, as in a secret society.

Caribbean catastrophes

Could the CLICO crisis have been averted? It's a haunting question, especially given the glaring red flags that executives and regulators seemingly ignored, blinded by shared assumptions and a dangerous groupthink mentality. Wayne Sover - all, in his paper "Clico: The Rise and Demise of a Caribbean Conglom erate,' highlights 'poor corporate governance, weak risk management practices, and inadequate management information systems' as major culprits. Martin Daly further points to the 'grievous lack of due-diligence care and attention' by top executives and regulators who approved questionable investments, ignoring warning signs.

The recent NiQuan debacle raises similar concerns. How could cred itors allow debt to balloon to such unsustainable levels before sounding the alarm? This echoes the CLICO pattern: when top executives and oversight bodies share flawed perspectives, a dangerous groupthink takes hold, blinding decision-makers to risks and alternative strategies. In such an environment, failure becomes not just possible, but inevitable.

The danger of 'yes men' (and 'yes women') When critical voices are silenced, bad decisions are inevitable.

When there is no real appetite or desire for a frank exchange of views, this way danger lies.

When leaders only seek alignment, executives and directors are only there to rubber-stamp.

Alfred Sloan, the legendary CEO of General Motors, understood this. He famously instructed his execu tives, nodding in unison, to 'develop disagreement' before returning to the discussion. Even President Ken nedy, during the Cuban missile crisis, left the room to encourage candid debate among his advisors.

Why? Because fear of displeasing the boss still haunts most meetings.

Break the bubble

Real talk: Encourage open, hon est conversations.

Red teaming: Designate a team to challenge prevailing opinions.

Devil's Advocate: Assign some one to argue against the majority view.

Whistleblower hotlines: Provide safe channels for reporting concerns.

Independent brainstorming:

Gather ideas before group discussion to avoid bias.

Challenge: Look for disconfirm ing theories not supporting evidence to test, test and test.

Enable uncomfortable questions: Make it clear that you, the boss, value these.

The moral of the story

A culture of questioning and dis sent is essential for organisational health. Diverse perspectives and rig orous debate lead to better decisions and, ultimately, better outcomes.

We know something is wrong yet we are often more afraid of stepping on a few toes or 'upsetting' our friends, our leaders, our tribe than we are of everything going belly up and it being far too late to change course.

We should be terrified when we see people who are otherwise intelligent and rational, chorusing absurd ideas and concepts that defy logic, dangerously compromising business ideals and individual rights.

Bosses: Don't be like King Lear and create a 'stage of fools'.

Boards: Keep calm and be disa greeable. It is your moral and fiduciary duty to do so.

'The power of facing unpleasant facts is one of the greatest powers we have.' -George Orwell Angélique Parisot-Potter Shareholder and employee advocate TED speaker and Former General Counsel

BY ANGELIQUE PARISOT-POTTER