Group discussion is very valuable; group drafting is less productive.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Groups tend to believe their work is harder, more strategic, or just more valuable while underestimating those contributions from other groups.
Groupthink can become a serious issue - old ideas stay around after they're useful, and new ideas too often don't get a fair hearing.
When it's a sharing and improvisational meeting, where you're riffing off other people's ideas, that actually can be productive.
The aspect of congresses and such meetings generally to which I attach the greatest importance is the discussion. That is why people assemble: to hear different opinions, rather than to pass resolutions.
Meetings get a bad rap, and deservedly so - most are disorganized and distracted. But they can be a critical tool for getting your team on the same page.
Most groups today aren't groups. In a true group all the members create the arrangements among themselves.
It is better, as far as getting the vote is concerned, I believe, to have a small, united group than an immense debating society.
Collaboration is the best way to work. It's only way to work, really. Everyone's there because they have a set of skills to offer across the board.
Discussion is just a tool. You have to aim; the final goal must be a decision.
People tend to work in teams, in a collaborative way, in an informal network. If you create an environment like that, it's much more effective and much more efficient.
No opposing quotes found.