Speak with less conviction: Persuading others is not easy. It is generally believed that we convince others by speaking with conviction. Is this effective? No, it isn’t. We shouldn’t talk with too much conviction if we want to persuade people.
Nancy Dixon wrote a fascinating blog post on this subject titled Bringing the Flow of Knowledge to a Standstill by Speaking with Conviction. She points out that speaking with too much conviction can actually shut down the exchange of ideas. When someone speaks with unwavering certainty, it can come across as though no other perspective is possible, as if the conversation has already been closed. That’s not exactly the best way to foster dialogue, is it?
Think about the last time you were in a conversation where someone was absolutely convinced they were right. How did it feel? Were you inclined to agree, or did it make you dig in your heels? This is the paradox of speaking with too much conviction—instead of persuading others, it often hardens their opposing views.
Nancy’s insights remind me of Ellen Langer’s work on mindfulness and learning. Langer, a professor at Harvard, argues that we learn more effectively when information is presented conditionally rather than absolutely. For instance, instead of saying, “This is the answer,” you might say, “This could be the answer,” or, “This might be the case.”
Langer’s research shows that this subtle shift in language fosters creativity and deeper understanding. When students are encouraged to think about possibilities rather than absolutes, they’re better able to adapt to new situations and discover solutions for themselves. The same principle applies to our conversations. When we express ideas with openness and a willingness to explore, we invite others into a dialogue where mutual learning can happen.
This approach is not about being indecisive or lacking confidence. It’s about being mindful of how we come across to others. Speaking with too much conviction can inadvertently signal that we’re not open to new ideas—that we’ve already made up our minds. And once people sense that, they’re less likely to engage with us meaningfully.
Over the years, I’ve met people who believe it’s their duty to point out when someone is wrong. They say things like, “I have to set them straight. They need to learn.” But more often than not, this approach backfires. Instead of convincing anyone, it creates resistance. If we truly want to change minds or share knowledge, we need to approach the conversation as equals, not as lecturers or enforcers of truth.
It’s okay to have convictions, of course. But communicating them with a touch of humility—a willingness to be proven wrong or to see things differently—makes all the difference. It opens the door to richer, more productive exchanges. It transforms what could be a one-sided monologue into a two-way conversation.
So, here’s a small habit to try: listen to yourself when you speak. How strongly are you coming across? Are you leaving room for others to contribute their perspective? If not, dial it back a little. Instead of saying, “This is how it is,” try saying, “This might be how it is,” or, “Here’s one way to look at it.”
It’s a subtle shift, but one that can change the tone of a conversation completely. You’ll find people more willing to listen, to share, and to learn alongside you. And isn’t that what real communication is all about?
In the end, persuasion isn’t about overpowering others with your conviction. It’s about creating a space where ideas can flow freely and minds can meet. Speak with less conviction, and you might just find yourself connecting more deeply with those around you.
In this blog post by Nancy Dixon, Bringing the Flow of Knowledge to a Standstill by Speaking with Conviction, Nancy says:
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 convinced that what we believe is true, it serves no useful purpose to say it with great conviction other than to annoy people. If you wish to convince someone, you should be open to being shown to be wrong or discovering that you are talking at cross-purposes.
Over the years, several people have told me that when they see someone doing or saying something wrong, they have to point it out to them in no uncertain terms — that they “have to learn.”
This might make them feel good, but in my experience and from what I can see from behavioral research, it does not work. It only hardens their opinions and increases their dislike of you. If you wish to convince someone, you have to be open to a two-way conversation of equals.
Nancy’s post also reminds me of the work of Ellen Langer and her book The Power of Mindful Learning. Ellen is a professor of psychology at Harvard University, and her behavioral research challenges many myths about learning.
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
So, her research shows that writing with conviction also hinders learning.
Contrary to popular belief, do not speak or write with too much conviction if you wish people to learn from you! It’s OK to have convictions – but not to communicate them seemingly arrogantly.
Things Todo
- Habit: Listen to yourself when you talk. How strongly are you coming across? If it is too strong, tone things down a little. Don’t speak with too much conviction.
Resources
- Blog Post: Bringing the Flow of Knowledge to a Standstill by Speaking with Conviction by Nancy Dixon
Posts that link to this post
- Should We Speak with Authority and Conviction? May be not
- The Simple Power of Complex Stories Thaler Pekar | TEDxTralee Ireland
POST NAVIGATION
CHAPTER NAVIGATION
Tags: conviction (2) | Ellen Langer (2) | mindfulness (6) | Nancy Dixon (13) | opinion (9) | persuasion (11)
SEARCH
Blook SearchGoogle Web Search
Thursday 27th February 2025, 15:00 to 19:00 London time (GMT)
Learn how to design & run a Gurteen Knowledge Café, both face-to-face and online.
Information and Registration