Groupthink vs The Abeline Paradox: When consensus goes wrong

In a recent conversation, the topic of the Abilene Paradox came up. It was quickly dismissed as ‘just another name for group think’. No, not really. Let’s look at why.

Both groupthink and the Abilene Paradox show us how teams make decisions, not because they lack intelligence, but because they suppress honest conversations.

The difference lies in the why.

• In groupthink, people genuinely believe the group is right. Pressure to conform (social norms), maintain harmony, or avoid conflict leads to overconfidence and a narrow view of options.

• In the Abilene Paradox, people don’t agree with the decision, yet they go along anyway, assuming others do. The group collectively chooses something that no one actually wants.

  
  

How is it possible that a group of individuals could or would act against their own interests? It seems crazy, doesn’t it? Yet it happens!

In both cases, silence replaces healthy discussion and disagreement. The lesson? Consensus shouldn’t come at the cost of candour. The best teams create psychological safety where disagreement is welcome, not something to fear or avoid.

They nudge us think more deeply about how agreement happens in teams, not just what they agree on. The power of social proof and the role of psychological safety play out in both situations.

Which do you think is more insidious? Which have you seen happen in your workplace?

Side Note: Where does the Abilene Paradox gets its name?

It originates from a story (real or fiction?) about a family who drove a long way to Abilene, Texas, for dinner, despite none of them wanting to go. It goes like this:

• A family is sitting on a porch in Coleman, Texas, on a very hot day. The father-in-law suggests they drive to Abilene for dinner, a trip of about 50 miles. Everyone agrees, with each person secretly believing their own desire to stay home is out of step with the group.

• So, the family takes a long drive to Abilene for an average meal. They later discover that no one really wanted to go.
  

It’s a paradox because the group made a seemingly collective decision that no one person supported individually. Each person wanted to avoid conflict and assumed the others wanted to go.

Management expert Jerry B. Harvey coined the term in his 1974 article titled ‘The Abilene Paradox: The Management of Agreement’ after using this anecdote to illustrate how groups can make decisions that none of the individuals want, often due to a failure in communication and a misinterpretation of the group's consensus.