Devils Advocate…
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to provide some training in conflict techniques. I taught a simple process I first learned from Craig Webber in the book Conversational Capacity of recognizing emotional increase and either asking a question or further unpacking personal thinking. We transitioned quickly into Crucial Conversations and an equation of a fact, a personal reaction, and a question. While teaching and training I caught myself saying the more curious we are during times of “emotional charge,” the better the potential outcome of the meeting or conversation.
This morning that got me thinking about the “Devil’s Advocate” role. A quick internet search taught me the original role of the devil’s advocate was a position in the catholic church, and their job was to argue against the sainthood of an individual being elevated by the catholic church. I have heard of teams assigning someone to the role to challenge the best levels of thinking, but I have also read some social science that shows someone arguing a point they don’t actually hold can have a negative impact on the decision-making process.
The books Blink, and Thinking Fast and Slow have shown the benefit of quick, intuitive thinking as well as slower, deliberate thinking and taught tangibles for when to use the different approaches. Richard Rumelt, in Good Strategy Bad Strategy, brilliantly describes strategy as difficult and complex and explains that the uncertainty from the complexity causes discomfort, that intuition provides an idea, and that the first idea provides relief from the discomfort. Kahneman, in Thinking Fast and Slow, describes this as an anchoring effect. Rumelt says that after the initial idea saves us from discomfort, we will use tremendous mental energy to confirm our original idea so that we don’t mentally have to go back into the discomfort of not knowing.
Reflecting on the training yesterday, I’m curious how this complexity in thinking and emotions impacts our teamwork and relationships. I think my statement to them about being curious is true, but given what I’ve seen and read, I’m curious about how to stay curious when things get tense. Having a “Devil’s Advocate,” even if it’s an internal process, seems like the easy button. However, Psychologist Charlan Nemeth, in her book In Defense of Troublemakers: The Power of Dissent in Life and Business, explains inauthentic dissent can actually increase the drive for confirmation of our original idea in a need to be right. So hopefully, my curiosity will increase my curiosity.
Leaders, how do you stay curious when emotionally charged?