Speak with Less Conviction Speaking with conviction inhibits learning

Speak with less conviction: We often think persuasion comes from speaking with confidence. In practice, strong conviction can shut conversation down. When ideas are stated as certain, others have little space to engage, question, or learn.

In a blog post by Nancy Dixon, she makes a simple but important observation about how we speak to one another at work:

One way of talking that inhibits the exchange of knowledge is speaking with conviction.

That may seem contrary to what we’ve all learned in communication and leadership workshops, where one of the lessons often taught is to speak with confidence- “sound like you mean it”.

Yet, as I examine conversations in the work setting, stating an idea with conviction tends to send a signal to others that the speaker is closed to new ideas.

When speaking with conviction, people sound as though no other idea is possible, as though the answer is, or should be, obvious.

Credit: Bringing the Flow of Knowledge to a Standstill by Speaking with Conviction by Nancy Dixon

I agree with Nancy. Even when we are confident that what we believe is correct, stating it with strong conviction rarely helps. More often, it irritates people or signals that the conversation is already closed. If we genuinely want to persuade someone, we need to be open to the possibility that we might be wrong, or that we are simply talking past each other.

Over the years, people have often told me that when they see someone doing or saying something wrong, they feel compelled to point it out firmly, that the other person “has to learn”. This approach may feel satisfying in the moment, but in my experience, and supported by behavioural research, it is ineffective. It tends to harden positions rather than change them, and it often damages relationships in the process. Persuasion works far better as a two-way conversation between equals.

Nancy’s post also brings to mind the work of Ellen Langer, particularly her book The Power of Mindful Learning. Langer, a professor of psychology at Harvard University, has spent decades challenging deeply held assumptions about how people learn.

One of the pervading views in education is that in order to learn a skill one must practice until the action takes place without thought. Performing a skill over and over again so that it becomes second nature may lead to thoughtless or mindless interaction with the skill or concept. Mindlessness is a hindrance to discovery. Discovery often occurs because of a variance of the “basics”.

Teaching in a conditional manner allows the learner to recognize that there may be varying situations that require a varied response. Teachers often eliminate factors that would lead students away from the “correct” outcome. We come to learn that events occur in a predictable manner and lose sight of some of the factors that contribute to the outcome. For example, physics students are instructed to neglect friction for most of the situations they deal with. This produces a discrepancy between actual and theoretical results and may dampen a students ability to see distinctions.

Research has shown that information presented conditionally versus in absolute form enhances the creativity of the students. In a study done by Alison Piper, groups of students were given information on a set of objects conditionally and in absolute form. The students that were given the information conditionally had a tendency to be more creative than the students that had the information presented in absolute form.

The standard approach to teaching new skills rely on either lecturing to instruct students or using direct experience to instruct students. Ellen Langer proposes a third approach which she calls “sideways learning”. Sideways learning involves maintaining a mindful state that is characterized by openness to novelty, alertness to distinction, sensitivity to different contexts, awareness of multiple perspectives, and orientation in the present. The standard approach involves breaking down a task into discrete parts which may stifle novelty and alertness to distinction. Sideways learning makes it possible to create unlimited categories and distinctions. The distinctions are essential to mindfulness.

Langer asks and answers the question, “Can a text teach mindfully?” She gives examples of obscure tax code and the ability of students to apply the code to a variety of situations. Students that read the section of tax code in its original language had a more difficult time adjusting to situations that weren’t spelled out in the code. The group of the students that studied the code that was slightly altered with “could be” and “possibly” instead of “is” were more successful in application.

Credit: The Power of Mindful Learning: Chapter One – When Practice Makes Imperfect summarized by Scott Allen

Langer’s research reinforces the same point from a different angle. When information is presented as fixed, absolute, and certain, it limits curiosity, creativity, and learning. Language that leaves room for possibility encourages exploration and engagement.

Seen this way, speaking or writing with strong conviction does not just hinder conversation. It can also hinder learning itself.

Contrary to popular belief, we should not speak or write with too much conviction if we wish people to learn from us. It’s OK to have convictions, just not to communicate them arrogantly.