The Abilene Paradox - Causes

Have you visited Abilene? You probably did and didn’t know it. Many groups take this ‘trip’ but don’t realize they are in route until it is too late. Abilene, Texas may be a great town, but as a leader, make sure your team never goes there.

The Abilene Paradox is an allegory describing a common form of miscommunication called group think. It was originally coined in the 70’s by Texas native Jerry B. Harvey, a professor of management science at George Washington University.

In his book The Abilene Paradox and other Meditations on Management, Harvey described a family experience in which four relatives agreed to drive an hour to Abilene for dinner. Four hours later, after enduring 100+ degree heat, no air conditioning and a not-so-great meal, his mother commented that she only went along because everyone else wanted to go. A second relative snapped that he only agreed, because he thought everyone else wanted dinner in Abilene. The conversation quickly dissolved into a full-blow family argument when it became evident that while everyone had agreed to go no one actually wanted to go.

The Abilene Paradox describes a unique problem that arises not from conflict, but from agreement. It is what happens when a group makes a collective decision that is in direct opposition to the actual desires and beliefs of individual members. The irony is that often team members agree privately about the best possible decision. Yet, when convened as a group, they fail to publicly voice their opinion, passively accepting the decision of the group.

The Abilene Paradox:

When organizations take actions in contradiction to what they really want to do and therefore defeat the very purposes they are trying to achieve.

Do not think The Paradox is limited only to business. The need to “effectively manage agreement” as Harvey calls it, is needed in non-profits, family interactions, sports teams – anywhere people need to make decisions as a group. In fact, Harvey suggested that “the inability to manage agreement is a major source of organizational dysfunction.”

There are a number of reasons for passive agreement in teams. Occasionally, silence is a form of loyalty to, or support of, the leader. In another situation one person may be driving the entire team to Abilene by dominating the discussion with his strong opinions.

Most often the paradox happens when individuals fear the repercussions of speaking up in a group setting. Typically, that fear reflects a concern for job security or retaliation from the leader. Others may hesitate to speak up out of fear of being ostracized from the group or being seen as different. In either case, the result is not only a poor decision, but also a lack of grassroots support for the decision. Together these are a recipe for disaster because

agreeing TO something is vastly different than agreeing WITH something.

Do you have thoughts about how effective leaders can avoid a trip to Abilene? Next week, I’ll explain my solutions and include your ideas as well. Leave your comments below or email me at SubtletiesofLeadership@gmail.com