Largely noted as an utter disaster and failure of John F. Kennedy’s tenure as president, the Bay of Pigs invasion stands today as a historical event that displays classic examples of poor leadership and even poorer followership according to Janis’s “Groupthink” article. Janis outlines six characteristics of the group’s flawed judgments during the planning process for this important attack on Cuba, many of which also reflected on the nature of Kennedy’s bad leadership. For example, the “illusion of invulnerability” stood out to me as a matter of very positive group dynamics gone wrong. As a select group of specialized members chosen by such an illuminating and optimistic figure as Kennedy, these collaborators had no choice but to feel a sense of good will and cohesiveness. However, this case demands even more of a steady manner of planning and levelheadedness. It is too easy in scenarios such as these to develop what Janis mentions as “unlimited confidence” (327). One cannot simply cast aside notions of possible complications such as the enemy getting the better of one’s strategy or unforeseen issues that arise in the future.
However, I find it most interesting that such a failed invasion did not hurt the Kennedy administration in the historical eye. Looking at the Kennedy years from a retrospective point of view, today’s society tends to view these years through the proverbial rose-tinted glass, considering first and foremost JFK’s buoyant mannerisms, his administrations positive contributions such as the Peace Corps, and finally his lamented death. True, the Bay of Pigs remains in the history books as a failure but not of Kennedy’s; rather, it is seen as more of a failure on the part of the American government than of an individual. This phenomenon can be noted once again on the other side of the spectrum: in terms of positive innovations, Kennedy becomes responsible for the work.
Questions:
Could it be that Janis also falls under the spell of the rose-tinted glass when considering the Bay of Pigs invasion and the planning that went into it?
When is groupthink a good thing?
Perhaps the rose-tinted glass you talk about in this post can also be classified as groupthink. As Americans, people might still buy into Kennedy's elevated status (even for a president) because they are participating in a larger American groupthink that prevents them from critically analyzing historical events.
ReplyDeleteGreat point, Eric! I never considered it that way, but what you say makes sense. From this point of view, we can also deduce that society participates in some manner of groupthink every day, demonstrating the fact that groupthink can also be a good thing.
ReplyDelete