Abilene paradox

[ciphergoth]

Just randomly found this on Wikipedia: Abilene paradox - the possibility that a group decision will be made for X even though every single person in the group would prefer Y. This is a familiar situation to me, and I'm sure that's usual. It can be hard to express a preference weakly - you say "I'd slightly prefer not to get starters", and no matter how many caveats I put on that, it's rare that anyone is prepared to say "well, I really like their spring rolls so I would like to get starters if everyone else is OK".

On the other hand, it's kind of a good problem to have - I'd rather these problems than have everyone fighting to put their own needs ahead of everyone else's...

Comments

[booklectica]

Oh God, the number of times I've worried that I'm forcing 10-15 people to do something they don't really want to do because I'm the only person making any suggestions...

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

In this instance, the paradox suggests that your primary duty is to ensure that you personally want to do the things you are suggesting, so that at least one person likes them!

[booklectica]

Also, one would hope that if one person starts saying what they really want to do, and making it clear that that's what they're doing, others will follow. Doesn't always seem to work though.

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

*nods*
I used to be very wary of being too definite about what I did/didn't want to do, in fear of everyone else saying, "bugger off and do that then, we're going to sit here/go to the pub/watch cartoons", and me being left all on my own because I didn't want to follow the majority.

I'm a bit tougher these days, I think.

[drdoug.livejournal.com]

This is a good plan in my book.

I'd say an even better course is to be assertive about what you want, and try to help others to do the same. This has the double benefit of reducing to at least one person preferring the decision, and encouraging better processes to emerge.

When out and about with my extended parental family we frequently ended up with similar group decision-making failure modes: both the straight Abilene paradox and (more commonly) a meta-variation where there's endless postponement of a decision because nobody would express a preference, and everybody would have preferred an arbitrary decision made quickly. Canonically we'd wander round the streets for literally hours looking for somewhere to have lunch until we started to get snappy from hunger and tiredness.

Much better these days that I'll express my preference - weakly or strongly as appropriate - and we take it from there. Even if it's "I'm happy to eat pretty much anywhere, but I'd be happier if we don't walk around for ages choosing somewhere. How about we look at the next three on this street and pick the one we like best out of those?"

[devilgate.livejournal.com]

Yes: the father-in-law in the original anecdote as cited on Wikipedia is an idiot, because he suggests doing something he doesn't want to do, when everyone else is happy as they are. If he was worried that they were bored, as suggested, he should just have asked them.