Part One: Analyzing the Socio-Psychological Foundations of Conformity

Acceptance is a genuine belief in what the group has persuaded you do to (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). Acceptance happens when you sincerely believe the group’s actions are right. Compliance, on the other hand, is conforming to an expectation or request without really believing in what you are doing (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). Compliance could be seen in everyday norms, like crossing the street in specific way or standing in lines- people comply to keep the peace or keep things running smoothly, but don’t necessarily feel strongly about the rules they’re complying with. Obedience differs from both acceptance and compliance in that it involves doing something you otherwise wouldn’t do. Obedience happens because rules or laws require it, but if the rules and laws didn’t require it, you wouldn’t do it at all (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). Obedience can be a slippery slope, as we’ve seen in obedience experiments- like the Milgram experiments- because once someone obeys a few times, it’s difficult to suddenly stop. In a group dynamic, acceptance can look like showing respect to everyone because it’s the right thing to do. Compliance looks like gathering in a meeting room at 8 a.m. because it helps the group work cohesively, even if some would rather show up at 9 am. Obedience is locking the doors to the meeting at 8 a.m. and not discussing the contents of the meeting with those who were late because that is the rules. It may not seem fair if someone was in a car wreck on their way there and needs to know some of the information discussed, but obedience would be standing firm in the guidelines- maybe to gain acceptance with the bosses, or out of fear of being reprimanded for disobeying.

Normative influence springs from the desire to be liked (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). It is going along with the crowd to avoid rejection, stay in people’s good graces, or to gain their approval (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). Informational influence, on the other hand, springs from the desire to be right (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). It consists of doing things because it seems like the correct way to be doing them. In the group dynamic, normative influence can include laughing at someone’s idea along with the rest of the group, so you feel like you fit in. Informational influence looks like putting your report into a binder with plenty of infographics because it has consistently the most effective way done by everyone else that you’ve seen. Normative influences can lead to segregation and discrimination within the group while informational influences can lead to structure and group efficacy.

As humans, we are inclined to have consistency in our thoughts; so when our thoughts are inconsistent, we tend to justify our behaviors to reduce our internal discomfort (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). This sort of internalized justification often happens at an unconscious level, making it difficult for us to identify when and why it happens. Our attitude changes can happen so subtly that we don’t even remember having a differing attitude at times (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). This also makes it difficult to recognize cognitive dissonance within ourselves.  

The most effective way to reduce cognitive dissonance is through direct actions- attitudes follow behaviors (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). For example, getting someone to make a public statement about exercising will likely cause them to exercise more (Meyers & Twenge, 2022). In a group setting, having meetings that begin with the goals of the company and how people are contributing to achieving them can help people realize that these goals are attainable. Going around the group and having each person offer a suggestion of what they bring to the goal attainment process can help shift them into a state of cognitive consonance as they’re realizing their contributions make a difference. They will also be more likely to act on those contributions.

As we can see in the Asch Conformity Experiments (2011), anonymity can impact a person’s decision to deviate from the norm and not contribute to group pressure. These experiments also show that a person is less likely to conform if at least one other person in the group also fails to conform. Therefore, allowing people to respond to contentious subjects in private may reduce their likelihood of conforming. Also, if you believe you are dissenting, instead of fearing that you’ll be alone, you can take solace in the fact you may encourage others to dissent as well.

Part Two: Reflecting On the Conformity Experience

When working in a daycare, rules changed as often as recommended guidelines did. This was especially true in my classroom, the infant room, as safe sleep guidelines are constantly changing and often challenged. Right before COVID began, the guidelines changed once again, and we were no longer allowed to let infants sleep in swings or bouncers- we had to put them in a crib with no blankets and no swaddles- which is extremely difficult when there are eight infants used to sleeping in various ways-none of which involves a crib with no swaddle. The new guidelines made the job extremely difficult, and the long-term teachers dissented- saying they were going to continue putting infants to sleep in the ways that work best for those infants. While newer employees conformed to the newer guidelines, older employees dissented- empowered by one another to refuse to conform.

Cohesion was also relevant to the scenario described above. Since the long-term teachers had known each other better, interacted with each other more, and had more experience with infants, they influenced one another more than they had influenced the new employees. The tendency to dissent was amplified by the cohesiveness of the long-term employees.

Using the same example, the status of management was a major influence on the new employees to conform to the new guidelines. Although the older employees were being set in their ways, the power that management had was a higher status than the status the older employees held. This high status setting the regulations for the room caused the newcomers to conform to the new guidelines instead of following in the lesser status employees’ footsteps.

Part Three: Integrating the Negative and Positive Aspects of Conformity Within the Group Dynamic

Conformity can cause many negatives impacts on group collaboration. To begin, the motivation of group members declines when they feel they do not have free-will to exercise their own opinions and choices. When group members are all conforming, individuality declines, followed by motivation in individuals. Secondly, the identity and individuality of group members also suffers at the hands of conformity. As mentioned, conformity causes declines in individuality. By decreasing this uniqueness of members and all persons conforming to a uniform standard, people begin to lose their identity. They begin identifying as only part of the conforming group rather than their own ideas and opinions. Third, the perceptions of fairness toward group members are hindered dramatically. Equality is not the same as equity and by holding everyone to the same standards, we lose sight that people have different circumstances. Conforming as a group makes us consider people as part of the group rather than their individual selves. When we evaluate people in terms of a group, we begin to lose sight of fairness and equity. Lastly, conformity greatly hinders the creativity and diversity of group members. Having all members conform to one set of group ideals completely eliminates the possibility of unique and creative ideas. People may fear dissenting, which can cause a lack of creativity. It can also create problems with diversity. We are all individual people with differing backgrounds and worldviews. By having all members conform to a group ideal, we leave out the potential to consider diverse perspectives, which can greatly hinder group productivity as well.

Although there are many negative effects seen in conforming, we can also find some positive effects of conformity on group collaboration. To begin, having members all work together and conform to the group ideal, we create a sense of cohesiveness among group members. They begin identifying with each other and with the group ideal which can make it easier to collaborate on projects. Secondly, the intergroup harmony between group members is increased. As group members identify with a group and recognize that others also identify with a group, communication can be easier. Relating to others helps build relationships that open doors for effective communication. Thirdly, productivity among group members may actually be increased. When everyone recognizes they play a part in the overall goal, they may be more inclined to increase their individual productivity. Further, if the group has a specific goal to meet, an individual’s productivity may be conformity. They may fear backlash for not meeting the group’s standards. Lastly, conformity may positively impact learning amongst group members. As members work to conform to the group ideal, they learn behaviors and techniques from within the group. In an attempt to conform to group ideals, group members are learning from one another the ways to work most effectively to reach that goal. 

As we have found, conformity can either positively or negatively impact group collaboration. Therefore, using socio-psychological concepts previously discussed can help optimize the group collaboration experience. My first recommendation is to foster a sense of group cohesion. By finding the things that bring group members together and help them relate to one another, the group’s cohesion can help enhance the group’s collaboration. My second recommendation is working towards creating informational influence among the group. By posing goals and values in a way that causes group members to reframe their thought processes in order to achieve these goals, this informational influence can enhance the group’s collaboration. My third and final recommendation is to create guidelines that allow the group members to achieve compliance in working toward the same goal. This may be deadlines or start times that ensure the members are complying and the work required is being done according to a standard set for everyone in the group. This will help other group members know what their expectations should be and create a common understanding amongst the group.

References

Asch Conformity Experiment. (2011, March 26). Pumpitoutdotcom. Asch Conformity Experiment - YouTube

Meyers, D., & Twenge, J. (2022). Social Psychology, 14th ed. https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/books/9781260888522