Blessing and Curse

At a recent conference for senior leaders in the public safety sector, I had the opportunity to hear from a leader facing a difficult (albeit common) challenge. In an earnest attempt to tear down a known obstacle within the organization AND show appropriate care and concern for those involved, the plan, when ‘rolled out’, received immediate backlash to the point where the entire program could potentially be dissolved. The leader expressed frustration that people within the organization could not fully grasp the intent behind the strategy or understand how it would benefit the very individuals most strongly opposing the change. Consequently, both the organization and those affected were moving toward an outcome neither desired—one that fell short of what the communities they served deserved.

Lessons from Experience: When Leadership Backfires

Based on my own experience, I can remember numerous occasions as a leader when my sincere attempts to help those I served ended up creating plans that worked against their interests. Most often, this was due to my inability to (1) explain the ‘problem we are trying to solve’ and ‘why it is the right problem to solve right now,’ and (2) engage diverse critical perspectives from those impacted by the problem to achieve a holistic ‘picture of success.’

The Double-Edged Sword of Clarity and Conviction

This conviction often produces a ‘path forward’ that they see so clearly that it is common to assume all others ‘see what they see’ with the same level of clarity.

As we partner with strategic leaders, we (gently) remind them that the ‘problem to solve’ which they have been focused on for the best possible outcome provides the confidence and determination needed to move forward toward success. As a result, this conviction often produces a ‘path forward’ that they see so clearly that it is common to assume all others ‘see what they see’ with the same level of clarity. This level of clarity and conviction is extremely valuable when facing challenges that require the exact ‘bold action and inspirational leadership’ discussed in the previous article, Lead Inspired.

The Hidden Cognitive Risks in Decision Making

And this same clarity and conviction pose the following cognitive risks in decision making:

1. Under-communicating the depth and breadth of the plan.
2. Failing to identify gaps because we as leaders assume shared understanding.

There are two (2) cognitive science biases that help leaders understand why this is (unfortunately) very common: The Curse of Knowledge and The Illusion of Transparency.

The Curse of Knowledge

Coined by economists Colin Camerer, George Loewenstein, and Martin Weber in 1989, the Curse of Knowledge describes how once we know something, it’s hard to imagine what it’s like not to know it. As a result, leaders who have spent considerable time, effort, and energy refining a strategy cannot easily ‘see’ the strategy from the perspective of someone hearing it for the first time (Camerer, Loewenstein, & Weber, 1989)[1]. The impact of this bias manifests itself through a lack of clear communication, skipping steps that are assumed ‘obvious’, and seeking out minimal feedback which ultimately leaves gaps undiscovered.

The Illusion of Transparency

First studied by Gilovich, Savitsky, and Medvec in 1998, The Illusion of Transparency makes us believe our internal states (thoughts, intentions, emotions) are more apparent to others than they really are (Gilovich, Savitsky, & Medvec, 1998)[2].  As a result, leaders often assume that their care and concern for people within the organization are obvious and embedded in the strategy itself. As a result, we as leaders may expect alignment when not present, believe all who hear the plan will know ‘why this matters’, and fail to clarify priorities and expectations.

How Awareness Builds Stronger Communication

However, we have seen numerous situations where understanding these common biases helps leaders strengthen both their planning process and the way they share that plan! Understanding that these cognitive biases are present and impact our ability to accomplish our objectives will lead us to mitigate the risk through the following actions:

1. Seek diverse, critical thought from all echelons of the organization to determine the ‘problem to solve’, why it is the right problem to solve right now, and what success ‘looks like’ once the problem is solved.
2. Once a joint solution is identified, test the plan for gaps prior to ‘rollout’ by seeking out additional perspectives from those ‘not in the room’ to determine where the plan may be lacking in terms of completeness and clarity.
3. Share the plan strategically throughout the organization through all who contributed to the solution process, inviting clarifying questions from every level to confirm that its purpose and intent are clear.

Seeing the path ahead with clarity and conviction is essential for invested leaders tackling difficult problems. Recognizing the risks of cognitive bias empowers leaders to strengthen alignment across the organization, uncover hidden gaps, and communicate more effectively. At the same time, understand that the right amount of communication is always “more” when demonstrating genuine care and concern for everyone involved in accomplishing the mission.

[1] Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., & Weber, M. (1989). The curse of knowledge in economic settings: An experimental analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 97(5), 1232–1254. 1>

[2] Birch, S. A. J., & Bloom, P. (2007). The curse of knowledge in reasoning about false beliefs. Psychological Science, 18(5), 382–386. 3>