Standing out from the pack, it can be quite uncomfortable. That said, getting noticed as being different or better and having a unique and valuable perspective requires exactly that.

There was an interesting experiment by Soloman Asch back in 1951 that studied how people conformed to the opinions of the people around them. In the experiment, groups of 8 students were asked to view simple diagrams of three lines labeled (a), (b) or (c). There was also a comparator line and the participants were asked to state aloud which line was the same length as the comparator line. The correct answer was always obvious.

Here is an example with one of the pair of cards where the participants were asked which line was the same length as the one on the right: a, b, or c.

In the experiment, all the students were introduced to each other as participants in a “perception” experiment but in truth, 7 of the 8 were actors who have been given instructions ahead of time to vote out loud unanimously. The actors were scripted to provide the correct answer most often but to occasionally provide the incorrect answer. The real participant was always the last person to vote. The objective of the experiment was to understand how often the real participant conformed with the group and provided the incorrect answer even though the correct answer was obvious.

In 37% of the cases where the actors uniformly select the wrong, answer, the real participant also selects the same wrong answer. After the experiment, the real participant was advised what the true experiment was about. Interesting findings here are the reasons the participant stated they conformed.
– “They must be right – there are many of them and only one of me so I must be wrong”. This is a distortion of their judgment where they genuinely believed that the others were correct.
– Peer pressure – they knew the answer they were giving was wrong but didn’t want to rock the boat. They expressed fear of being ridiculed or thought peculiar.

The experiment had several variations. In one variation, the participant was given an actor ally that gave the correct response. In this situation, when the participant had a partner, the yielding was reduced to only 5% of the time. In other words, when even one person supported the correct answer, the conformity to the group answer was reduced significantly.

When I think about this experiment where a person conforms to peer pressure or to common perception within a group of strangers, it makes me wonder how people conform in peer situations were we know the people involved and value the relationships. I suspect that in these cases, conformity would increase significantly.

What’s some learning we can take out of this experiment? First, if you have an opinion that you feel strongly about, express it. It’s possible that the rest of the people have it wrong or that they are simply going along with the norm as well. You aren’t going to stand out as being different and valuable by following the herd. Second – if you do have an opinion that is unique – build an ally, any ally, and it will make selling your idea much easier.

I remember in my very junior years at the bank we were in a meeting at head office to generate ideas for a fund raising drive for Children’s Hospital – a charity I believe in strongly. We were tossing ideas around and one of the junior people – even more junior than me – said “Why don’t sell peanuts?” Everybody laughed and I joined in. Then it dawned on me that maybe the idea warranted some exploring. Before the laughing even stopped I said “Actually, maybe that’s not such a bad idea.” She now had an ally. We spent a few minutes thinking about it and decided it might just work. We implemented the idea and, as a result, raised well over $100 thousand. If you have an idea, speak up. If you suspect it will be rejected… create a second voice as an ally first.

Here’s another example we’ve all experienced. We are in a meeting with someone leading a brainstorming session to gather a bunch of ideas. The facilitator lists all the ideas until the topic has been exhausted. No judgment is applied to the ideas and no idea is a bad idea.

Participants are given a set of three to five dots to place beside ideas. People gather at the front of the room excited about ensuring their ideas or the “best” ideas of others get their dots. Some people even use more than one dot on one idea to sway the decision – who’s going to notice.

If you think back to the Asch experiment, the herd mentality of “right answers” starts to appear. People with half their dots left start placing them on the most popular answers. After all, they are most popular, therefore they must be right.
After the dot placing session, the top few ideas, the ones with the most dots, get selected for further discussion and potential action plans. In this manner, the two or three great ideas that are unpopular get cast aside until the next planning session where the same thing happens.
If you are ever in a brainstorming meeting like this again, here’s what you might do to give the unpopular ideas a fair shot. Ask if instead of placing dots, the facilitator could number the ideas. Following that, people could have “secret ballots” where they vote for their selections. You’ll be amazed at the lack of conformity when that happens.

I had a CEO once who, when in meetings, would say: “I’m not going to give you my opinion because as soon as I do that, it becomes everyone else’s. I need to know what you think.”

If there is one take away from these examples it is this: In order to be valued, you need to be valuable. You are most valuable when you have unique perspectives. Use your voice.