Making the Undiscussable and Its Undiscussability Discussable

A t the very time that the sophistication of managerial technology and information systems increase, polls inform us that (1) the public's confidence in the ability of public and private organizations to perform effectively is decreasing and (2) the confidence of the public in professionals who provide services and manage institutions is also steadily decreasing (National Opinion Research Corporation, 1978). There are no doubt several factors contributing to these trends. I should like to focus on one set of these factors that is crucial. I refer to the inability of organizations to discuss risky and threatening issues, especially if these issues question underlying organizational assumptions and policies. The curious feature of this factor is that in most cases the information required to discuss the issues intelligently is available (albeit scattered) in the organization. The problem is that discussing or writing up risky issues is unacceptable. For example, I watched memoranda written by young foreign service officers get "their edges rounded off" before they were submitted by the superiors to their respective superiors. It is not surprising to hear a senior official ask with frustration, "Do you think I can get a memo on China that I could not read in Time magazine?" Perhaps this is why George Ball is quoted as having described the State Department as a fudge factory. The description that I just gave implies that the problem is organizational. This, in turn, implies that organizations should be managed in such a way that there is less conformity and group think. These implications are valid. My recent research suggests, however, that the organizations may not be the basic cause of the problem. It appears that most individuals in our society (and in many societies throughout the world) are taught,