Group think & then take action

Both business and societies need to move away from individual thinking, planning and control toward group think, supply and action. If for no other reason, the COVID-19 pandemic and the new ones that will surely be playing out over the next years, we have learned that, as individuals, as stand alone hospitals and as unique governments, we cannot tackle global issues alone. Only by combining group intelligence, strategy and control can we overcome these global threats to our way of life.

It doesn’t matter if you’re American when a pandemic lands on our shores — individualism will not, by itself, thwart the danger. In fact, individualism can only make matters worse, forsaking a broad discovery and innovation resource available globally. Edward de Bono, the eminent philosopher and psychologist who advocated teaching thinking in school, created a problem solving ethic called “lateral thinking” — putting aside your individual tried-and-tested thought process and emulating a sideways or completely unnatural thinking parameter to arrive at clarity and hopefully a successful result. Part of America’s problem — especially this administration’s problems — in combating COVID-19 has been a linear thinking model, one where you double down on what you planned to do instead of seeking out alternatives, cooperation with others and arriving at a more successful result.

The military has a rigid command structure, yet if you examine their warfare methodology carefully, it is always dependent on group think: a collection of in-the-field reports and assessment that are coalesced into a broader picture of the battlefield completely deviating from a dictatorial command structure. One of the reasons our military is so successful is precisely because we endow the individual soldier with autonomy in battle and, taking reports from that soldier, the higher command can form a battle plan that can properly assess the needs of the war. It is like computer data input. The more data you put in the computer for calculation, the more likely the accuracy of the readout. Without that group think, errors are more likely to be catastrophic.

In business, group decision by committee ruins everything when it is applied as a safety measure, often being understood as reducing risk. Decision by committee is not group think, it is group decision, which is not the same thing as it increases risk of producing lowest-common-denominator products that quickly fail. If a company wants to assess the viability of a new product, they need to widen the assessment of that product — good and bad — and then allow the command structure uninterrupted individualistic decision making.

In the cause for fighting the environmental, all too often people turn to decision by committee instead of group think. Result? Half-measures and wasted resources (money and people). A perfect example on how to achieve change is the Chipko Movement. As a group, these women and mothers in Indian villages agreed on a common purpose: To stop deforestation. Why? Because when the hillsides were clear cut, the rains came, washed down floods of mud and killed their children. They group thought past lobbying the government, past protesting the logging companies and, like Edward de Bono, thought laterally and simply realized to go to the beginning: protect the trees. They were the first tree huggers (literally).

If, in California, the people who wanted to protect the Spotted Owl had thought laterally, they could have realized the problem was the commercial (wages and jobs) need from logging. Instead of stopping logging and putting thousands out of work, if they had applied to retrain and create new industries for the loggers, a lasting compromise could have been found. In fact, the loggers would have had a better future with wood industry jobs instead of shipping the raw logs to Japan and overseas. But they all didn’t group think, the owl saviors listened to and followed a strident voice who turned on the tried and tested protest/lobby/legislation method and the forest was “saved.” Hardly.

America is the land of the individual, but without the ability to call on the resources of the many and the collective value of group think, the individualist decision maker will stray from a better future. Henry Ford knew this when he gathered GNP data and analyzed groups of American’s desires — the result? Doubling the wages of his workers’ day rate. What were they going to buy? Model Ts.

Fighting pandemics and emergencies is like that. Group think, group assessment has to be the first step to a successful plan going forward. It is, in a sense, what our Constitution demands: Deliberative bodies that come to a conclusion based on Congress’ group think. Until that process is restored, away from petty dictators making poor, often irrational, decisions and pretending these are the will of the people, we cannot right the ship, nor be better prepared for the next emergency coming our way.

 

Peter Riva, a former resident of Amenia Union, now lives in New Mexico.

The views expressed here are not necessarily those of The Millerton News and The News does not support or oppose candidates for public office.

Latest News

Millerton’s 175th committee advances plans for celebration, seeks vendors and sponsors

The Millerton 175th anniversary committee's tent during the village's trunk-or-treat event on Oct. 31, 2025.

Photo provided

MILLERTON — As Millerton officially enters its 175th year, the volunteer committee tasked with planning its milestone celebration is advancing plans and firming up its week-long schedule of events, which will include a large community fair at Eddie Collins Memorial Park and a drone light show. The events will take place this July 11 through 19.

Millerton’s 175th committee chair Lisa Hermann said she is excited for this next phase of planning.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why the focus on Greenland?

As I noted here in an article last spring entitled “Hands off Greenland”, the world’s largest island was at the center of a developing controversy. President Trump was telling all who would listen that, for national security reasons, the United States needed to take over Greenland, amicably if possible or by force if necessary. While many were shocked by Trump’s imperialistic statements, most people, at least in this country, took his words as ill-considered bluster. But he kept telling questioners that he had to have Greenland (oftenechoing the former King of France, Louis XIV who famously said, “L’État c’est moi!”.

Since 1951, the U.S. has had a security agreement with Denmark giving it near total freedom to install and operate whatever military facilities it wanted on Greenland. At one point there were sixteen small bases across the island, now there’s only one. Denmark’s Prime Minister has told President Trump that the U.S. should feel free to expand its installations if needed. As climate change is starting to allow a future passage from thePacific Ocean to the Arctic, many countries are showing interest in Greenland including Russia and China but this hardly indicates an international crisis as Trump and his subordinates insist.

Keep ReadingShow less
Military hardware as a signpost

It is hard not to equate military spending and purchasing with diplomatic or strategic plans being made, for reasons otherwise unknown. Keeping an eye out for the physical stuff can often begin to shine a light on what’s coming – good and possibly very bad.

Without Congressional specific approval, the Pentagon has awarded a contract to Boeing for $8,600,000,000 (US taxpayer dollars) for another 25 F-15A attack fighters to be given to Israel. Oh, and there’s another 25 more of the F-15EX variant on option, free to Israel as well.

Keep ReadingShow less
Truth and evidence depend on the right to observe

A small group of protesters voice opposition to President Trump's administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Amenia's Fountain Square at the intersection of Route 44 and Route 22 on Saturday, Nov. 8, 2025

Photo by Nathan Miller

The fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, and before him Renée Good, by federal agents in Minnesota is not just a tragedy; it is a warning. In the aftermath, Trump administration officials released an account of events that directly contradicted citizen video recorded at the scene. Those recordings, made by ordinary people exercising their rights, showed circumstances sharply at odds with the official narrative. Once again, the public is asked to choose between the administration’s version of events and the evidence of its own eyes.

This moment underscores an essential truth: the right to record law enforcement is not a nuisance or a provocation; it is a safeguard. As New York Times columnist David French put it, “Citizen video has decisively rebutted the administration’s lies. The evidence of our eyes contradicts the dishonesty of the administration’s words.”

Keep ReadingShow less