Three Barriers To Curiosity And How To Overcome Them
I have had the opportunity (and blessing) to be exposed to, challenged and learn from numerous roles in my life at work (or as Reid Hoffman co-founder of Netflix likes to say, “tours of duty”). My roles have ranged from entrepreneur, professor, private equity firm owner to consultant, Executive Coach, CEO Mentor and a principal advisor for a Single Family Office.
Based on these “tours,” the most predominant theme (and obsession) for me in business leadership is the consideration and practice of CURIOSITY. One thing is for certain: curiosity is given a lot of lip service; leaders say they value curiosity. They have good intentions. But in reality, most leaders stifle curiosity. What is the main reason for this “mild to extra strength” stifling? The nagging fear that if curiosity is allowed it will increase risk and inefficiency. Too many leaders unintentionally devote their thought and practice to sustaining status quo thinking. This erodes their ability to exercise curiosity, not to mention poor modeling of curiosity for their team and company.
Rather than share the obvious reasons for curiosity, I will present three barriers to curiosity that I consistently see and work on with individuals and senior teams.
To maximize curiosity, leaders should do the hard work of seeing what they (and their teams) THINK and/or DO to INHIBIT curiosity—the barriers they create and accommodate for.
A fact of human nature: individuals and teams will always have barriers. Both need to recognize these barriers and view them as legitimate opportunities in developing their people. Recognizing and owning up to those things that stand in the way of becoming curious is the sign of a mature leader. Too often, curiosity takes a back seat to efficiency, output and short-term ROI.
The three barriers to curiosity are:
1. The Experience Barrier
Basically, your experience becomes your base for reasoning. Experience can be a valuable asset. However, William Shakespeare said it best, “Your greatest strengths beget your greatest weaknesses.” It is all too easy to slide into the habit of turning to personal strengths to solve every problem that comes your way. Often a leader’s barriers are not the usual suspect (aka “weaknesses”), but the opposite—an overplayed strength which stems from past successful experiences. One of the most consistent behaviors I see play out is the leader’s over-reliance on strengths, eventually becoming a default position. Through overuse, leaders create thinking barriers for themselves, which in turn sets them up to reduce the contribution and performance abilities of employees, teams, and their company. And when this occurs with the CEO, COO or CFO, people that report to them will often adopt their barrier behaviors for themselves.
In his book, What Got You Here Won’t Get You There, Marshall Goldsmith, retired Executive Coach adeptly sums this up. In it, he describes the truth that the more success we experience, the more positive reinforcement we get—and the more likely we are to experience what Goldsmith calls the “success delusion.”
Permit me to share Dr. Goldsmith’s pithy rephrase:
“I behave this way. I am successful. Therefore, I must be successful because I behave this way.”
2. The Assumption Barrier
Our individual and collective worlds cannot operate without assumptions. Assumptions are easy, convenient, and safe. Assumptions are necessary for issues of immediacy, “life and death” responses. Assumptions are how we get things done. Once we assume something to be true, we can move on with our life, our work and plan accordingly. One way our brain saves energy is by making assumptions. We draw on our past experiences to find patterns in how the world works. When we encounter new situations, we apply these patterns—or assumptions—to the new environment. But when we “go with assumptions” so we can get to the point or solve a problem, we can easily do ourselves and others a disservice. The more time I spend observing leaders, I note how little they pay attention to their assumptions.
I use a simple, highly effective model to create awareness and discipline around identifying assumptions. In working with a client, I ensure that they have proven their competency of the model by applying it to themselves for three months before they move onto others. Not only does this make common sense, but a byproduct also engenders humility.
The model was developed by two Harvard professors, Richard Neustadt (Public Administration) and Ernest May (History) in the early 80’s. The model consists of three parts:
What is KNOWN
What is UNCLEAR
What is PRESUMED
If you want to save yourself (1) a significant amount of time, (2) increase the focus and quality of your discussion, (3) attain better qualified results, this tool is for you! In adopting this tool my clients become painfully aware of the ease of which they generate and accept their (and others) assumptions. It allows them UPFRONT to question their assumptions BEFORE engaging in discussion. Yes, that is the optimal time to challenge assumptions. This works beautifully, too, when a team does this together.
Start with any issue at hand, perceived problem, or given situation. Next, create three separate columns with abovementioned headings for each column across the top of a page or large Post-it note. A bonus of this model is you start out placing your ATTENTION on the SITUATION itself, instead of on the question, “What should we do?” By developing a list under each category, your first action is to secure agreement with all participants on what is KNOWN, UNCLEAR or PRESUMED. Bingo! You just nailed it by coming to agreement on assumptions. The worst time to question assumptions is at the end of conversation, or when a decision has been made. Too often assumptions don’t surface until much later when people have made up their minds and are invested in their position. This exercise has proven to be one of the most valuable tools in my practice.
3. The Clarity Barrier: Transformation vs. Change
Often, these two words are used interchangeably, which limits capitalizing on curiosity. Knowing the difference allows an individual to think differently, which affords a separate and distinct avenue for curiosity to flourish.
Here are the distinctives for each of the two terms:
Transformation
is present to future, seeking to create a future.
seeks to generate a fundamental shift in perspective, activating wonder and imagination—which leads to discovery or invention of a different or new business model for the future.
fundamentally shifts the way an organization operates.
asks, “What If?”
is much more unpredictable—which translates to significantly higher risk.
Change
drives to product a better version of what already exists; it often “fixes” the past (e.g., “our customer service response time needs to be faster”).
is firmly embedded in the past to the present.
asks, “Why is this not working?”
is incremental, step by step, and very programmatic.
If you want to maximize the benefits of curiosity, you need to carefully select what you want to achieve—change or transform.
They are both radically different paths seeking to achieve different results. Pick the right road—before you embark. During my work with clients, I am mindful of this and often “catch them in the act” (wrong road) which affords them the opportunity to reassess and shift.
At Building Champions, we create customized coaching engagements that focus on both the beliefs and behaviors of great leadership. We guide leaders, teams, and organizations to be healthy and high-performing so they can have a greater impact on everyone they serve.