We study experimentally the challenges of network coordination in groups that share goals but are subject to local and noisy information. We show that consensus on the correct action declines in larger networks, networks with fewer local connections, and asymmetric networks, where misinformation forms small stubborn pockets of incorrect beliefs. Groups with more exploratory and adaptive participants perform best. Our findings explain persistent societal misconceptions such as vaccine hesitancy or climate denial. They highlight the importance of well-informed, highly connected networks for improving collective decision-making in situations such as committee deliberations, team projects and public goods.