The Power of "I Don't Know"
Today I asked a colleague a question about how our partner network operates. He paused for a moment, and then began what felt like a never-ending monologue response. I tried to re-direct a couple of times, re-asking the question with different angles, but always the same wandering, generic response.
It was obvious that he did not know the answer to my question. But rather than say, "I don't know", he told me everything he DID know... just on topics completely irrelevant to my question. What he didn't realize is that it's good, no GREAT, to admit "I don't know".
Saying "I don't know" implies that there is an answer out there... that more curiosity, investigation, and imagination is needed. Conversely, mashed-up responses tend to confuse, contaminate and close-off the topic being discussed. it implies that the answer is known and no more exploration is needed - and that's bad for innovation, because it's the unknown answers that hide the best insights and ideas.
So, if you get asked a question to which you don't know the response, admit it. Don't wind down the conversation with a lengthy response, wind it up by saying "I don't know", let's think about how we can find an answer!
It was obvious that he did not know the answer to my question. But rather than say, "I don't know", he told me everything he DID know... just on topics completely irrelevant to my question. What he didn't realize is that it's good, no GREAT, to admit "I don't know".
Saying "I don't know" implies that there is an answer out there... that more curiosity, investigation, and imagination is needed. Conversely, mashed-up responses tend to confuse, contaminate and close-off the topic being discussed. it implies that the answer is known and no more exploration is needed - and that's bad for innovation, because it's the unknown answers that hide the best insights and ideas.
So, if you get asked a question to which you don't know the response, admit it. Don't wind down the conversation with a lengthy response, wind it up by saying "I don't know", let's think about how we can find an answer!
posted by ROInnovation at 7:32 PM
7 Comments:
Scott this reminds me of the other habit people have when they are presented with something new for the first time in business - to find something wrong with it. We exhibit our intelligence according to how much we can criticise something. How long do you think it will take people to realise that that's the easiest way not to innovate? Why do you think this is the most common type of response? Can we realistically expect to be able to change company cultures to make the unconstructive criticism unacceptable? What will that take?
Criticism is easy. It takes more mental energy to find the potential in an idea and figure out how to accentuate it.
Replacing criticism with more support and positive energy is a big cultural shift. What if a company implemented a rule that before you can criticize an idea you first have to name two things you like about it? If it became a reflex reaction to find the positive elements in an idea, you could affect culture change. How else could you focus your people on building an idea up instead of stripping it down?
I agree with what you say, there definitely has to be a balance though. Coming from a company that has lots of ideas that get implemented I think we've suffered from "initiative fatigue" so there is instinctively a negative response from the employees. Is the answer to make the people who create the initiatives more discerning, or to inspire the employees to accept the new initiatives more?
Anyone who has read “The Yes Man” by Danny Wallace will know that excessive positivity can open exciting new doors, but also leave you vulnerable to having a meal with your ex-girlfriend when she's on a first date with someone else...
Peter - first off, I think you're fortunate to be working for a company that is too ambitious as opposed to not ambitious enough. You pose an interesting question, and I'm certain I don't have a definitive answer... just an opinion (since, it's kind of chicken and egg, and hey, one of them had to have come first).
I think we have to make people more discerning. I have not seen what I would consider to be an effective method of "evaluating" ideas. Most companies have their stage-gate process, or simple criteria which ideas must meet to enter the pipeline... but these approaches generally lack flexibility.
It would be brilliant, game-changing stuff if we could conceive of an evaluation process that reliably identified the highest impact ideas. A company could ingrain such a process in the minds of its people, entrusting them to apply it to their own ideas. Then, implicitly, when an employee decided to bring an idea forward, it would only be after they had validated it themselves (via this - at this point - imaginary process).
Then, the ideas coming to the surface would be of a higher caliber (and fewer number). That means less "initiative fatigue" and more excitement around ideas that rise to the top. Plus, a more empowered workforce.
So, that begs the questions... what companies do this well? How do they do it? Have you ever seen an effective "evaluation" process? What were the steps, the components, the players involved? Let's see what we can conceive of together.
By the way, I was in a Presentation Skills training session today, and the trainer said, "People around here get paid to pick apart your ideas." Hey, I know judgment is needed now and then, but if it was my payroll I'd rather people were first focused on imagining what was possible, and secondly, determining which ideas (or elements of ideas) could and should become reality.
I remember a particular workshop where I closed the session with one of my favourite tools (that gives you a barometer of how everyone is feeling).
It goes like this - you ask everyone in the room to write down one thing that they found useful during the whole day - just one. And then you ask them to also write down one thing that they are still a bit concerned about or want to say for making the next meeting even better.
Normally this forces people to be positive first, and offers you the opportunity to hear the appreciation from the team. It forces them to listen to each other's points, which validates many more reasons why the meeting was useful. In giving their concerns you allow them in a constructive way to voice to you and the others in the room what could be better, or even concerns that exist outside the remit of the meeting. You also write down everything they said to use in planning the next steps.
Anyhow, in this one meeting with a particular European technology client known for being extremely rational and critical, every single person struggled - really struggled - to come up with just one thing that was positive. They had learned so well in their organisation how to criticise, they found it really uncomfortable to be positive.
And I knew there were many good things about the day to be said - I mean if you're desperate you can at least say "it was good to be away from my desk for the day!"
Anyhow, I feel so sorry for people who can't find one good thing to say, I really do. Imagine actually working there? yikes!
Maybe after a month you should ask everyone to say something positive and then negative about the blog! For me making sure that blind people don't go to visual focus groups is a good one...
Post a Comment
<< Home