06 -- Groups and Authority.ppt

  

Groups and Authority

Groups and Authority

  

Week 6

  Week 6

  

Every One Has Their Price

Every One Has Their Price

   You have heard the saying that “Every

  You have heard the saying that “Every

  One Has Their Price”?

  One Has Their Price”?

  

It means, of course, that no matter what

  It means, of course, that no matter what

  your values, most people are willing to sell

  your values, most people are willing to sell them out, if the price is right. them out, if the price is right.

   I would like to find out your price…

  I would like to find out your price…

  An Indecent Proposal An Indecent Proposal

   You remember the film, “Indecent

  You remember the film, “Indecent

  Proposal?”

  Proposal?”

   Well, mine is a little different.

  Well, mine is a little different.

  

 I would like to know how much someone

  I would like to know how much someone

  would have to pay you to kill an innocent

  would have to pay you to kill an innocent person. person.

   Let’s assume for this that you also would

  Let’s assume for this that you also would be guaranteed not getting caught. be guaranteed not getting caught.

  

What would be your price?

What would be your price?

 Take a minute to think.

  Take a minute to think.

   Would you do it for a million dollars?

  Would you do it for a million dollars?

   Would it take ten million?

  Would it take ten million?

   Think of all the good things you could do

  Think of all the good things you could do with the money. with the money.

  

 Do you think your fellow students would do

  Do you think your fellow students would do

  it? For how much?

  it? For how much?

  

Student Financial Aid

Student Financial Aid

   Usually, in every class about a fifth of the

  Usually, in every class about a fifth of the

  class would consider it, usually for

  class would consider it, usually for

  between a million and ten million dollars

  between a million and ten million dollars

   There are exceptions:

  There are exceptions:

   In one class two students were willing to

  In one class two students were willing to do it for $20 and a couple of CDs. do it for $20 and a couple of CDs.

  

 Another student said he was willing to do it

  Another student said he was willing to do it

  for free, and anyone who would take

  for free, and anyone who would take money for it was a kind of “prostitute”. money for it was a kind of “prostitute”.

  Low budget assassins? Low budget assassins?

  

 What percentage of 100 people do you

  What percentage of 100 people do you

  

think would kill an innocent person for

  think would kill an innocent person for

  $20?

  $20?

   1%, maybe 2%, 5% or even 10%?

  1%, maybe 2%, 5% or even 10%?

   Take a guess…

  Take a guess…

  Believe it or not? Believe it or not?

   What if I were to tell you that under the

  What if I were to tell you that under the

  right circumstances, I could probably get

  right circumstances, I could probably get

  at least 50% of 100 people to kill an

  at least 50% of 100 people to kill an

  innocent person for $20?

  innocent person for $20?

   Do you believe it?

  Do you believe it?

  How to get someone to commit How to get someone to commit murder

murder

   Stanley Milgram showed us how:

  Stanley Milgram showed us how:

   He designed an experiment within a

  He designed an experiment within a

  experiment. The outside experiment

  experiment. The outside experiment

  

appeared to be a study in learning. The

  appeared to be a study in learning. The

  real experiment was a study in obedience

  real experiment was a study in obedience

  to authority…

  to authority…

  A Shocking Experiment A Shocking Experiment

  

In the experiment, so-called "teachers" (who were actually

In the experiment, so-called "teachers" (who were actually

the unknowing subjects of the experiment) were recruited

the unknowing subjects of the experiment) were recruited

by Milgram to a lab at Yale University. They were asked by Milgram to a lab at Yale University. They were asked administer an electric shock of increasing intensity to a administer an electric shock of increasing intensity to a

"learner" for each mistake he made during the experiment.

  

"learner" for each mistake he made during the experiment.

  

The fictitious story given to these "teachers" was that the

The fictitious story given to these "teachers" was that the

experiment was exploring effects of punishment (for experiment was exploring effects of punishment (for

incorrect responses) on learning behavior. The "teacher"

incorrect responses) on learning behavior. The "teacher"

was not aware that the "learner" in the study was actually an was not aware that the "learner" in the study was actually an actor - - merely indicating discomfort as the "teacher" actor - - merely indicating discomfort as the "teacher" increased the electric shocks. increased the electric shocks.

   When the "teacher" asked whether increased shocks should When the "teacher" asked whether increased shocks should be given he/she was verbally encouraged to continue. be given he/she was verbally encouraged to continue.

  

A Shocking Result

A Shocking Result

   Sixty percent Sixty percent of the "teachers" obeyed orders to of the "teachers" obeyed orders to punish the learner to the very end of the 450-volt punish the learner to the very end of the 450-volt scale! No subject stopped before reaching 300 volts! scale! No subject stopped before reaching 300 volts!

   At times, the worried "teachers" questioned the At times, the worried "teachers" questioned the experimenter, asking who was responsible for any experimenter, asking who was responsible for any

harmful effects resulting from shocking the learner at

harmful effects resulting from shocking the learner at

such a high level. Upon receiving the answer that the

such a high level. Upon receiving the answer that the

experimenter assumed full responsibility, teachers experimenter assumed full responsibility, teachers seemed to accept the response and continue shocking, seemed to accept the response and continue shocking, even though some were obviously extremely even though some were obviously extremely uncomfortable in doing so. uncomfortable in doing so.

  Cries and silence

Cries and silence

   The “teachers” were even told that the

  The “teachers” were even told that the

  student had a heart condition, but that did

  student had a heart condition, but that did

  not stop them

  not stop them

   They would hear cries of pain, screams,

  They would hear cries of pain, screams, and after 300 volts, nothing but silence. and after 300 volts, nothing but silence.

   The “teachers” recruited in this

  The “teachers” recruited in this

  experiment, in essence murdered an

  experiment, in essence murdered an

  innocent person

  innocent person

  

Their price?

Their price?

   The “teachers” were recruited to the

The “teachers” were recruited to the experiment for pay of $8, the equivalent experiment for pay of $8, the equivalent of $20 today. of $20 today. defense often was based on "obedience" -

  

Why?

Why?

  

 Milgram’s study tried to explain the conflict

  Milgram’s study tried to explain the conflict

  between obedience to authority and

  between obedience to authority and

  personal conscience. He examined

  personal conscience. He examined

  

justifications for acts of genocide offered

  justifications for acts of genocide offered

  by those accused at the World War II,

  by those accused at the World War II,

  Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Their

  Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Their

  defense often was based on "obedience" -

  • that they were just following orders of their superiors.
  • >that they were just following orders of

      Groups and Authority Groups and Authority

       People often do things they shouldn’t

      People often do things they shouldn’t

      when misled by groups or authority

      when misled by groups or authority figures. figures.

       In addition, within groups, they often

      In addition, within groups, they often

      pursue power at the expense of agreed -

      pursue power at the expense of agreed - upon goals. upon goals.

       Most people don’t realize the power

      Most people don’t realize the power

      groups have over their lives

      groups have over their lives

      Groups and Organizations

    Groups and Organizations

      

     To achieve most anything you have to take part

    To achieve most anything you have to take part in a group or organization in a group or organization

      

     To take this class, you have to participate in an

    To take this class, you have to participate in an institution called CCSN. institution called CCSN.

       To get fit you usually have to join a gym or a To get fit you usually have to join a gym or a team team

       To be religious you often have to join a church To be religious you often have to join a church or similar group or similar group

       To help others, you often have to be part of a

    To help others, you often have to be part of a

    social service organization social service organization

      Higher Goals?

    Higher Goals?

      

     You might think that in all these situations

      You might think that in all these situations

      people would put aside petty motivations

      people would put aside petty motivations

      and work towards the higher goal…

      and work towards the higher goal…

       You might think so, but you would be

      You might think so, but you would be wrong. wrong.

       Think about what happens to

      Think about what happens to

      whistleblowers when they try to fix some

      whistleblowers when they try to fix some horrible mistake. horrible mistake.

       Don’t they often get fired?

      Don’t they often get fired?

      

    Group Decision making

    Group Decision making

      

     In addition, to such problems with authority

      In addition, to such problems with authority

      

    and power, there are often problems with

      and power, there are often problems with decision-making. decision-making.

       Risky shift Risky shift is the term for a propensity to

      is the term for a propensity to

      make riskier decisions in groups than one

      make riskier decisions in groups than one

      would make as an individual

      would make as an individual

      

    Space Shuttle Challenger

    Space Shuttle Challenger

       In 1986, the space shuttle Challenger, crashed

    In 1986, the space shuttle Challenger, crashed

    killing all aboard. killing all aboard.

       The cause was determined to be a faulty “O- The cause was determined to be a faulty “O- ring”, a kind of gasket. ring”, a kind of gasket.

       It was known by engineers to be faulty, but the

    It was known by engineers to be faulty, but the

    management wouldn’t listen. management wouldn’t listen.

       A Congressional Investigation blamed poor A Congressional Investigation blamed poor decision-making and recommended the case be decision-making and recommended the case be studied in every college and business school. studied in every college and business school.

      

    Space Shuttle Columbia

    Space Shuttle Columbia

      

     On Feb. 1, 2003, Americans were astounded by

    On Feb. 1, 2003, Americans were astounded by yet another shuttle disaster – this one destroyed yet another shuttle disaster – this one destroyed the shuttle Columbia. the shuttle Columbia.

      

     Amazingly, again poor decision-making about a

    Amazingly, again poor decision-making about a known defect, this time in the wing, was known defect, this time in the wing, was apparently the cause. apparently the cause.

       This time there was no Congressional This time there was no Congressional

      Investigation, apparently because officials were Investigation, apparently because officials were too embarrassed that it happened again too embarrassed that it happened again

      Group Think

    Group Think

       Psychologist Irving Janis calls decisions

      Psychologist Irving Janis calls decisions

      like this “Group Think”

      like this “Group Think”

       It is where groups lose the ability to hear

      It is where groups lose the ability to hear

    other viewpoints, and start to think alike.

    other viewpoints, and start to think alike.

       There is a reason why we say “two heads

      There is a reason why we say “two heads (or more) are better than one. (or more) are better than one.

       The more people involved the more likely

      The more people involved the more likely

      ALL circumstances are examined

      ALL circumstances are examined

      

    Group Cohesion

    Group Cohesion

       But as groups spend time together, they

      But as groups spend time together, they

      

    begin subtly to value their cohesion more

      begin subtly to value their cohesion more

      and more, that is the feelings of comradery

      and more, that is the feelings of comradery and belonging. and belonging.

      

     Eventually, they begin to think alike. Those

      Eventually, they begin to think alike. Those

      who don’t are no longer valued, and are

      who don’t are no longer valued, and are soon excluded. soon excluded.

       Would you have made the decision to let

      Would you have made the decision to let

      the Challenger or the Columbia fly?

      the Challenger or the Columbia fly?

      

    An experiment

    An experiment

       In my classes I used to use an example

      In my classes I used to use an example based on the Challenger disaster. based on the Challenger disaster.

      

    Instead of a space shuttle, I said it was a

      Instead of a space shuttle, I said it was a

      race car; instead of an O-ring, a engine

      race car; instead of an O-ring, a engine head gasket. head gasket.

      

     People were divided into groups and given

      People were divided into groups and given the same data as the NASA managers. the same data as the NASA managers.

      Stifling Dissent

    Stifling Dissent

       In every group, there was at least one

      In every group, there was at least one person who didn’t want to race. person who didn’t want to race.

       But in every group, they were voted down.

      But in every group, they were voted down.

       In some groups, students, turned away

      In some groups, students, turned away

      their chairs so they didn’t have to pay

      their chairs so they didn’t have to pay attention. attention.

      Cohesive Groups Cohesive Groups

       In government or corporate leadership

      In government or corporate leadership

    circles the problem may be even worse.

    circles the problem may be even worse.

      

     There cohesive groups form at the top far

      There cohesive groups form at the top far more cohesive than student groups. more cohesive than student groups.

       Bad decisions like the US invasion of

      Bad decisions like the US invasion of

      Cuba in 1961, the Iran-contra deal in

      Cuba in 1961, the Iran-contra deal in

      1986, the Firestone tire scandal in 1999,

      1986, the Firestone tire scandal in 1999,

      and the 2003 Iraq invasion are typical

      and the 2003 Iraq invasion are typical results. results.

      

    Cohesion and decision-making

    Cohesion and decision-making

       Cohesive groups have good qualities: they are

    Cohesive groups have good qualities: they are

    the best at getting things done. the best at getting things done.

       But they are the worst at decision-making, But they are the worst at decision-making, research shows. research shows.

       The scariest thing is something else the The scariest thing is something else the research reveals: research reveals:

      

     Cohesive groups have THE WORST DECISION

    Cohesive groups have THE WORST DECISION

      MAKING but they have THE HIGHEST MAKING but they have THE HIGHEST

      It’s food for thought.

      It’s food for thought.

       The end.

      The end.