Addressing Groupthink: Political Communication Strategies in the Indonesian Parliament Efficient and Impactful Policies

Abstract

This research emphasises the presence of symptoms of groupthink due to the perceived failure of judgements made under the Public Information Disclosure Act (PID) from the standpoint of civil society. The techniques employ instrumental case study inside the member group of Commission 1 of the Parliament of Indonesia. The findings demonstrated effective approaches to mitigate groupthink. The study utilises both primary and secondary data sources. Primary data refers to information that is obtained directly from the topic or thing being investigated. They serve as a research informant. The main source of information in this study was the official records of the meetings of Commission I of the House of Representatives from 2004 to 2009, where the discussion on the PID Bill took place. Furthermore, this study is supported by interviews conducted with carefully chosen informants who can provide evidence of the accuracy of the current meeting minutes or possess the necessary information required for this research. The chairman of the meeting in the commission I group is regarded as an adept moderator who can effectively handle and include all comments and criticisms from its members. The second tactic noticed involves conducting public hearing meetings to solicit expert opinions from academics, practitioners, and NGOs. The third tactic that emerges from the group dynamics during the discussion on defining public bodies is the involvement of certain group members who openly assume the position of devil's advocate.