GROUPTHINK

Mark Schafer & Scott Critchlow, Groupthink vs. High-Quality Decision Making in International Relations (New York: Columbia U. Press, 2010) ("Moving on in Janis's causal chain, the symptoms of groupthink include possessing an illusion of invulnerability, a belief in the group's inherent morality, the use of collective rationalizations, stereotyping the out-group, self-censorship, illusions of unanimity, directly pressuring dissenters, and the presence of self-appointed mind-guards. The symptoms of defective decision making include gross omissions in surveying objectives; gross omissions in the survey of alternatives; conducting a poor information search; processing information in a biased manner; failing to reconsider rejected alternatives; failing to examine the costs and risks of the preferred choice; and failing to work out detailed implementation, monitoring , and contingency plans. These behaviors increase the probability of low-quality decisions and outcomes ." Id. at 23-24 (citations omitted) Schafer and Crichlow go beyond Irving Janis, Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decision and Fiascoes (1972). From the backcover: "Analyzing thirty-nine foreign-policy cases across nine administrations and incorporating both statistical analyses and case studies, including a detailed examination of the decision to invade Iraq in 2003, the authors pinpoint the factors that are likely to lead to successful or failed decision making and suggest ways to improve the process. Schafer and Crichlow show how the staffing of key offices and the structure of central decision-making bodies determine the path of an administration even before the topics are introduced. Additionally, they link the psychological characteristics of leaders to the quality of their decision processing. There is no greater work available on understanding and improving the dynamics of contemporary decision making." I found this book quite helpful as I try to assess and understand the entropy in legal education. The key: With a few exceptions at elite law schools, legal academia is locked into a dynamic of groupthinking. The result: A continued and steady race to the bottom.).