… forse non fa proprio per tre, ma…
Il lavoro di gruppo spesso è controproducente: consultarsi frequentemente con altri porta fuori strada:
A neat experiment at Nottingham University shows how consultation can be counter-productive.
They got subjects to say whether a couple of paintings were by Paul Klee or Wassily Kandinsky. The subjects were split into two groups. One group comprised individuals making their own decisions. The other comprised individuals who were assigned to teams of six and allowed to consult team members.
And members of the teams did worse. Whereas only 29% of individuals got both paintings wrong, a whopping 51% of team members did so - twice as many as you‘d expect by chance.
There was, however, no significant difference in the proportions getting both questions right: 38% of individuals versus 36% of team members.
Consultation, then, increases the chances of a bad decision, without improving the chances of a good one. What’s more, people don’t realize this; most said that they found the consultation process helpful.
Il “lavoro di squadra” tende a essere sovrastimato, su questo punto la retorica ci ha lavorato ai fianchi per benino. Eppure ci sono parecchie patologie legate al pensiero di gruppo, distorsioni ben note agli psicologi ma che nel fervore di molti proclami torna utile sottostimare.
Non voglio con questo attentare alle vacca sacra della cooperazione. Per carità.
Ce n’ è comunque abbastanza per farsi bastare la “cooperazione volontaria” respingendo strane idee comunitarie dal sapore utopico.
