Item: BEING DIFFICULT: STRATEGIES FOR ENCOURAGING DISSENT FROM COLLEAGUES AND STAFF IN THE A.M. FORECAST MEETING
-
-
Title: BEING DIFFICULT: STRATEGIES FOR ENCOURAGING DISSENT FROM COLLEAGUES AND STAFF IN THE A.M. FORECAST MEETING
Proceedings: Proceedings, International Snow Science Workshop, Whistler, BC, Canada, 2026
Authors:
- Jenna Malone [ Alta Ski Patrol ] [ American Avalanche Institute ] [ Powderbird Helicopter Skiing ] [ Utah Mountain Adventures ]
Date: 2026-09-28
Abstract: Cognitive science and psychology have long explored how individuals can ignore or reinterpret crucial information to reinforce their existing beliefs. Research into confirmation bias shows that experts are more likely to adjust conflicting evidence to fit their views. Notable tragedies, including the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, Everest fatalities in 1996, and numerous avalanche accidents reveal that survivors frequently regret not speaking up about leadership decisions (Higginbotham 2024, Kayes 2006). Amy Edmondson of Harvard Business School describes a widespread reluctance to speak up within organizations, calling it a "culture of silence." Swiss researchers Bienesfeld and Grote, in a 2012 Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors article, observed that despite decades of Crew Resource Management initiatives to improve communication and reduce errors, air crew members still hesitated to challenge established practices. Dissent, however, should be lauded in high stakes decision making. Colin Powell, former U.S. Secretary of State, famously encouraged junior officers to voice disagreements, asserting that agreeable advice is of little value. Following the Vietnam War, the U.S. State Department introduced a "Dissent Channel" to foster honest reporting from the field. In the 1600s, the Roman Catholic Church appointed a "Devil's advocate" to scrutinize candidates for sainthood. Annie Duke, former poker champion and behavioral author, advises leaders to actively "farm" for dissent, create "truth-seeking groups," and conduct premortems to reveal hidden risks. Challenging hierarchy strengthens teams' capacity to be candid, even amid disagreement. While artificial intelligence increasingly contributes to avalanche forecasting, humans remain better at questioning assumptions and the status quo. A 2026 Stanford study in Science found that AI, particularly Large Language Models, affirmed users' actions 49% more than humans—even when those actions involved criminal behavior. This project investigates how forecasters in Utah's Central Wasatch Mountains in ski area, backcountry, highway, and helicopter ski guiding operations encourage dissent and skepticism among staff. Strategies include structured crowdsourcing at meetings, forecasters openly sharing uncertainty and intentionally demonstrating vulnerability. Ultimately, the ability to dissent may be the greatest asset humans bring to avalanche forecasting's inherent uncertainty. This paper outlines some operational methods for cultivating workplace cultures that value critical thinking and healthy skepticism and explores the importance of disagreement.
Object ID: ISSW2026_FS3.7.pdf
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15788/1790098446
Language of Article: English
Presenter(s): Jenna Malone
Keywords: dissent, psychological safety, avalanche forecasting, decision-making, crew resource management, groupthink
Page Number(s): 2378 - 2385
-