To encourage all workers to feel free to openly speak their mind in public rather than in private (another symptom of the paradox), an organization must make free expression part of its public culture. Routinely soliciting criticism and comments from everyone creates an idea that speaking up is encouraged, rather than discouraged. Top managers and CEOs must show that they respect diverse views by actually listening to managers who disagree with their own points-of-view. They must not feel threatened by a challenge, and set a good example through their own behavior for all managers to follow in a positive way.

All leaders must take responsibility for when their predictions and actions are wrong, to circumvent the tendency towards blaming one another that another symptom of the paradox. They must communicate to their employees that every employee is responsible for all of the actions taken by the organization on some level -- the excuse 'I had nothing to do with it' doesn't hold water if employees are silent in the face of mounting evidence that a decision is a bad one.

Creating a culture of change, where new ideas are solicited and channels of communication are kept open (rather than closed in the symptomatic paradox) creates a place where 'retreat' is acceptable from a bad decision. Treading water, or sticking with the same plan that worked many years ago is not only negative because it fails to take into consideration the economic current reality, but also...

Such an organization relies upon procedures and bureaucracy, not upon evidence and hard data. Fear of taking a personal risk in voicing dissent often arises from a general organizational fear of taking risks to change from the plan.
To put these positive policies into proactive action, good leadership is required from the top of the organization, and on every level of employment. A leader must be willing to admit his or her mistakes, to show lower-level employees that it is okay to challenge bad decisions with evidence. A good leader can speak up and state that he or she is taking control and thwart the groupthink of a cadre of managers that may be taking the organization off course. A leader must be unafraid to stand alone, and to take the risk of rejection -- and also take the risk of being right but unpopular. This idea goes against much of the current rhetoric of cooperation and team-building, although it is possible to incorporate Harvey's philosophy in a team context -- but the goal of Harvey is that even in the most closely-knit team, within the most comfortable organizational culture, no worker loses his or her essential individuality or personal sense of responsibility to ethics and truth.

Works Cited

Harvey, Jerry B. (Summer 1988). "The Abilene Paradox." Organizational Dynamics. 17 (1).