The Wisdom of Crowds is a really wonderful book about the ways to aggregate human intelligence and insight. It is also interesting because it looks at bubbles and spin that might be associated with "groupthink" where the thinkers don't have the chance to operate independently.
I actually saw an interview with Rummy in Chicago where the old robot actually whipped off some comments against the ideas being pushed in the 9/11 commission. He correctly attacked the "one czar" model. He is thinking the right way about the problem. (We can get into the problems that are created when you have VP and talking points prompting group think and the total failure of the world intelligence community to listen to Hans Blix and other UN Inspectors that thought there was no reason to go to war but that is another rant. )
Anyway, here is the Washington Post fessing up to group think problems.
An internal Washington Post review found that, before the invasion of Iraq, "Administration assertions were on the front page. Things that challenged the administration were on A18 on Sunday or A24 on Monday. There was an attitude among editors: Look, we're going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?" - in the words of the paper's Pentagon correspondent. Managing editor Bob Woodward said "groupthink" compromised coverage of weapons of mass destruction charges, but "we had no alternative sources of information."
In an information age, it is hard to assume that the key information is "hidden" but more likely to assume that it is our filters that are blocking it out.
Are you and your staff guilty of group think? Do you foster and empower a diversity opinions and tactics? Do you encourage your circles of friends and connections to "speak truth to power"? Do you diversify the thinking in your circles to encourage your own team to speak truth to the power of the group? The power of the boss? The power of funders?