“Just go with the flow.”

We’ve all heard this cliche — or been told to do it.

The idea goes that it’s easier — less costly, less risky — than going against the flow.

But there’s something huge at stake when we “go with the flow”:

We forget we have a voice.
We forget we can push back.
We forget that expressing a different point of view or making a different choice is possible.

To me, that is incredibly dangerous.

And there’s a term for it: pluralistic ignorance.

It’s a phenomenon that psychologist Deborah Prentice says makes you “feel like you’re different from everyone else, but in fact you are exactly the same. It’s a kind of illusory deviance, a sense that you are not with the majority.”

Dangerously, it’s a feeling that everyone in the majority can have simultaneously.

Pluralistic ignorance looks like no one raising their hand, no one disagreeing, no one speaking up — even sometimes defending ideas they hate.

We wait for *someone else* to speak up first because we don’t want to be the only one expressing a different opinion. We don’t want to be “that person” who has questions or doesn’t understand. We aren’t sure if we’re the only one thinking, “Wow, I do NOT believe in that,” so we play it safe. We stay quiet.

It’s a form of learned silence — and groupthink.

And we all know where groupthink takes us. It means:

• There’s no innovation, no progress, and certainly no learning.
• We stay stuck and stagnant.
• That the people whose voices are loudest or most confident control the narrative.
• We discover the problems after the fact — rather than nipping them in the bud.

So, how do we avoid groupthink? Here’s what I recommend.

Intentionally design the opportunity for different perspectives.

We’re accustomed to asking, “What do you think?” But that question can feel like a trap.

The other person often wonders, “Do you really want to know? How honest should I be? If I say what I really think, what backlash will I face? If I want to avoid conflict, I’ll tell you what you want to hear.”

Instead of asking “What do you think?” or assuming people will tell you, ask two standard questions that invite different perspectives:

• What about this works?
• What about this doesn’t work?

If “works” doesn’t fit your organization’s culture or your relationship, try pro/con, benefit/drawback, upside/downside, or appreciation/concern. No matter what words you choose, make sure the questions invite different points of view.

Train your team to expect that the two questions depersonalize dissent, difference, or opposition. The message is: “I’m not trying to oppose you. We’re all answering the same questions to make sure we’re getting to the best outcome — together.”

We can’t leave diversity of thought to chance. We must create it. We have to design safe spaces where people can speak up and say what they think — without consequence.

And when we invite different perspectives in the questions we ask (instead of relying on someone taking the risk to offer a different opinion), we’ll experience more innovation, more progress, and more dignity.

I’d love to hear from you: Have you ever experienced pluralistic ignorance? Or have you been the only person with the courage to speak up? Hit reply and let me know.

– Elaine