It’s quite common to see an adverse impact on participant motivation when people try to work in large groups.

Some participants may take a step back and let others do the heavy lifting. Others may dominate and monopolize the discussion, leaving no room for quieter participants to contribute.

When the degree of effort is disproportionate across the group, the more diligent members may become demotivated resulting in decreased engagement and contribution. Where one, or a small number of participants dominate the discussion, there is a risk that the valuable contributions that would have been made by the quieter participants are completely lost. This may have an impact on their sense of self-worth, making them less likely to engage in, and contribute to, the meeting.

As motivation is eroded, and participants are excluded, conflict can arise which damages morale and causes people to withdraw further from the discussion.

If you want to engage in a large group discussion don’t shy away from the challenges that can occur. Address them with the group and establish clear expectations for all meeting participants by setting and agreeing the ground rules.

The idea of a group of great minds coming together and being more than the sum of its parts often isn’t the case in large group discussions. In fact, it’s more likely that specific group behaviours will result in reduced creativity and productivity, which is completely the opposite of what was intended.

One of the most common group behaviours is groupthink. This happens when members of a group make decisions based on the perceived need to conform, avoid conflict, and achieve group cohesion. When groupthink occurs the individual group members abandon critical thinking. They no longer question or express any doubts for the decision-making process. Instead, they are focused on reaching a group consensus. This practice of thinking or making decisions as a group typically results in unchallenged, poor-quality decision-making that may have long-term negative outcomes for the group, and anyone impacted by its choices.

Help the group understand the groupthink phenomenon and implement strategies to help avoid it. Precede brainstorming with a period of individual thinking time, where everyone one has the opportunity to consider the problem statement, in silence, and generate their own ideas.

Assigning the role of Devil’s Advocate, sometimes called the Doubter, can also help deter groupthink. The role is assigned to an individual, or small number of individuals, in the group. Their job is to help the group challenge and advance its thinking, subsequently improving the quality of its decision making. The purpose is not to derail the discussion and halt the team's progress.

As with most things, there are benefits and challenges associated with the role of Devil’s Advocate. Done well, the Devil’s Advocate will stimulate creativity, innovation, and productivity by encouraging divergent thinking, engagement, and participation. They will help reduce the risk of overlooking important information by provoking individuals within the group to consider the weaknesses and the flaws in the thinking and decision-making processes. They should create confidence across the group to challenge any doubts and concerns and encourage them to make sure that the decisions are evidence-based.

However, done badly, the Devil’s Advocate can cause additional problems. If they are too dominant, or aggressive, or disrespectful they are likely to cause conflict within the group which can lead to participants becoming defensive, hostile, and resistant. They need to be able to help the group focus on relevant questions, objections, and possible alternatives without overcomplicating the process with too many variables. Bias, insincerity, and inconsistency will undermine their credibility, as will not having sufficient reasoning for the challenges they make.

The Devil’s Advocate needs to be confident but not arrogant. They need to be constructive in their approach, respectful in their challenges, and they must not be combative. They must be open-minded, a skilful communicator who can elicit information and who is able to acknowledge the merits and limitations of both own, and others’, points of view. They must be objective in their reasoning, rational in their discussions, and accurate with the facts.

Check out the Large Groups card in Meeting Essentials for some ideas on creating smaller, more agile, and more productive working groups.