Are you compatible with your organizational culture? I sure hope not. You need the freedom to break from the pack in order to pass along new information and adapt to disruptive change.
In the 2011 book Connected by Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler, the authors describe the way opinions and behaviors spread through social networks. They describe a Three Degrees of Influence rule: we influence and are influenced by people three degrees removed from us, most of whom we do not even know.
You might know one hundred people, but those people may know another one hundred people (each), and so on. This could result in a million people crowd-sourcing shared opinions. You would pick up many opinions from this extended network. The reverse is true as well. You could spontaneously assert that we should have all better table manners, and a million people might change their behaviors. Or maybe they’ll just talk about having better manners.
The implication is that you do not entirely experience independent thought. You might control what time you arrive at work, what garments to wear to the office, and how you respond emotionally to what your manager just said. But the allocation of housework in your household, the social norms in appropriate dress, and the organizational culture of two-way conversation could all be things that have significant third-party influence. You’re not exactly an autonomous hero in the workplace; you are a team-player in an environment where culture runs deep.
This critique has been revisited in a recent book review in which Yuval Harari summarizes The Knowledge Illusion by Steven Sloman and Philip Fernbach. Sloman and Ferbach posit that individual thinking is a myth, and that we actually think in groups. With modern civilization we have come to rely increasingly on the expertise of others. This crowd-think has mostly been good for us, but it also has a downside. People “…lock themselves inside an echo chamber of like-minded friends and self-confirming newsfeeds, where their beliefs are constantly reinforced and seldom challenged.”
Group loyalty and pride in our presumed intelligence causes us to stick to the normal way of doing things. This is a challenge to those of us who produce or consume new information. New information and new ideas disrupt stable group environments. If we are trying to change the workplace so that things are done differently, we must exchange discomforting opinions. We must propose ideas that will be rejected. We must try things out that won’t work.