It is estimated that more than 90 percent of the nation’s largest companies have most employees work in groups. They will give the group a project and have the group come up with the best way to complete it. They will put people into groups and then have them brainstorm to be more creative. They will tear down office walls-and now even cubicle walls-because they say this will encourage the free flow of ideas and improve productivity. Thousands of companies force people to work in groups to facilitate projects, be more creative and productive-and the results are less creative and productive workers.
This groupthink all began due to quasi-academic articles appearing in the ’60s and ’70s that theorized that group work does better than individual work, but these were opinions not based on independent facts-the writers had done little or no testing on the efficacy of groups versus individuals. However, the idea seemed so logical that people began adopting teamwork methods without proof that they worked-after all, aren’t two heads better than one? On the football field there is no “I” in team!-and the very concept of teams fit changing work demographics. In American culture, women tend to be more collectivist and group-oriented than men. As the percentage of women in the work force grew, the use of groups increased as well. The idea of groups was so embraced by schools that from the 1970s on, primary school students were typically taught in groups and rewarded for being a good group member and not selfish individualists. However, actual studies found that most of the supposed benefit from this groupthink and groupwork was baloney.
Multiple studies have found that “brainstorming”-where people sit around and throw out ideas-results in less creativity, not more. The main reason being that brainstorming usually means the loudest idea prevails, not the best. In study after study it was found that the best idea was usually held by one of the quieter members of the group, and he either didn’t speak it because he was afraid the group would disapprove, or the idea was ignored because it wasn’t shouted.
Offices that tore down walls to encourage “the free flow of ideas” found individual productivity went down. Why? Productivity is tremendously enhanced when people are left alone and not disturbed. This is why many office administrations incorporate partition wall in their interior designs. Think of it like building a fire on a stove. It takes time and works to get the fire going and growing, but after the fire has reached its critical mass, simply adding a small log from time to time will keep the fire burning hot-but a bucket of water puts out the fire and you have to start all over again. Every time “free-flowing communication” interrupts a person who is deeply involved in creating or working, it is like throwing a bucket of water on his productivity.
Roughly one in three adults is an introvert. Introverts are much less effective-and more uncomfortable-in team environments than extroverts. Worse results occur from projects completed in groups with introverts because they are more effective when assigned specific tasks or goals to meet. Forcing introverts to participate in teams not only drastically lessens their effectiveness, but may also be viewed as a type of bullying.
The best “teams” are those that aren’t, but are simply called a team because upper management likes the word. You can refer to a team of actuaries, but what they typically do is get their assignment, go off by themselves, and then everyone regroups where individual results are judged. A company can refer to their “sales team,” but when the team meeting is over, most salespeople go their separate ways.
If a company truly wants its workers to be more productive and creative, it will disband the teams, put up office walls and install office doors, and do away with brainstorming sessions. I doubt this will happen, because cultural myths are difficult to overcome. But if groups and teams were put to rest, workers and companies would be better served.
