Flexible Convictions
What's the ideal confidence level for personal and professional situations?
As I was growing up, my dad always seemed so sure of himself. More than that, it seemed like he didn’t see the need to question any of his beliefs. He always knew the next step he wanted to take.
As I got older, I’m now able to contrast the image I have of him with the image I have of myself. And only now I realize, there’s simply no way he was in fact that sure of himself. Is there? I mean, he was just a guy, trying his best at being a father, a husband, a friend.
This made me wonder - am I the flawed one for being unsure so frequently? Was he pretending? Or maybe he didn’t even recognize his own doubts?
I found myself reflecting on the confidence and uncertainties within my own beliefs, as well as their impact on my personal and professional relationships. Perhaps the core question of this stream of thought is - what’s the ideal level of confidence I’d like to have (and see in others) in both my personal and professional life?
The Confidence Crusade.
What makes confidence so interesting is that people like it. We like following people who are confident. However, as we all learn, in one way or another, just because someone is confident it doesn’t mean they’re right. But there must be some basis to our tendency to follow confident people. Right?
Confidence comes from the Latin word 'fidere' which means "to trust"; therefore, having self-confidence is having trust in one's self1. Around World War I, “psychologists praised self-confidence as greatly decreasing nervous tension… and ridding the battlefield of terror”2. It makes sense - when following someone into battle, I would prefer they act confident. But as the risk of physical harm decreases, so does the need to fake confidence.
It would be refreshing if everyone started being more honest about how confident they actually feel in what they say and do. We could even consider the possibility of valuing the opinions of less confident individuals just as much as those of confident people. Crazy, I know.
“Strong opinions, loosely held” is a known concept in the tech world (I couldn’t find who coined it). The idea is to encourage people to embrace bold beliefs while remaining open to changing them when presented with new information. It was meant to promote intellectual humility, adaptability, and continuous learning.
In recent years, several notable individuals came out stating the potential detrimental effects of a culture promoting such opinions (see Strong Opinions Loosely Held Might be the Worst Idea in Tech, and a follow up piece by Brad Feld). Their main argument against this concept is that it often leads to overconfidence and shuts down discussion, especially if the person voicing the opinion is in a position of power. Personally, in my own career, that hasn’t been the case. Quite the opposite. Too often discussions turn stale and strong opinions are scarce (regardless of the way they’re held).
Another argument against the concept is that underrepresented groups in tech may feel less comfortable engaging in open debate, causing the team to miss out on valuable input and hindering diverse decision-making. However, if the culture in question features individuals in positions of power being overconfident, leading to others on the team feeling uncomfortable expressing their own (hopefully just as strong) opinions, then the culture is flawed to begin with. But more on that in a minute. First, let’s explore how this concept might come in handy in our personal lives.
Strong Opinions At Home
Going back to my father (with his confidence and somewhat unwavering certainty), I can’t help but see the many advantages of having strong opinions. Yet, having the willingness to update and evolve those opinions when presented with new data is a must.
When I write, I often need to force myself to express an opinion. As I write, I get to see that opinion unfolds on the paper (or screen really). Seeing it unfolds teaches me a great deal about what my opinion really is. As a result, by stating my opinion strongly, I get to better understand myself.
“‘If you stand for nothing, Burr, what’ll you fall for?”
Aaron Burr, sir - Hamilton, Lin-Manuel Miranda
Stating my opinions firmly also has the very much desired result of having others tell me why I’m wrong. This often confronts me with my reasoning and helps me get one step closer to ‘the truth’. Tim Urban, the writer of the wonderful blog Wait But Why, put it so nicely on this Twitter thread (and most recently in his new book) as he referred to it as having an ‘Idea Lab’ like discussion (opposite from an echo chamber).
Finally, by stating my opinions strongly, I get to benefit from tracking any potential evolution in my belief system. Without such evidence, thrown out at the world, I’m much more likely to backwards rationalize and justify internally why I was right all along.
As mentioned by the critics of “strong opinions, loosely held”, this is not a foolproof system. Many times people get offended, stating my opinions are too harsh or blunt (or simply offensive). The solution to this, as with so many other things, is to make sure you keep the goal top of mind. What’s the goal? Uncover the truth and refine your thinking, not to win the argument.
And with that, and the mentioning of goals, we can transition into considering the potential of strong opinions in a professional setting.
Strong Opinions At The Workplace
With strong, yet flexible, opinions, we can promote lively debate, as passionate viewpoints are encouraged while simultaneously being open to revision. This openness not only fuels stimulating discussions but could also help to dismantle hierarchical gaps, as individuals feel more comfortable challenging and revising ideas regardless of their position.
This approach also better aligns with the scientific method, encouraging a constant process of hypothesizing, testing, and refining beliefs, fostering a dynamic and egalitarian environment where intellectual curiosity thrives.
On the other hand, bombastic claims made by over-confident individuals can often dominate arguments and stifle healthy debate. The assertiveness of such individuals may overshadow diverse perspectives, leading to a one-sided conversation that discourages open discourse. Also, as mentioned, underrepresented groups might face further challenges in asserting their opinions, which could perpetuate existing inequalities and hinder the exchange of valuable insights.
I believe teams and organizations can solve for these risks, and gain from the benefits mentioned, by doing 2 things:
Promoting a no asshole culture - every objection I’ve heard to having strong opinions in the workplace ultimately described a toxic culture, regardless of what and how opinions are expressed. A no asshole culture refers to a workplace environment that actively discourages toxic or harmful behaviors, including bullying, harassment, belittling, excessive egotism, and any other actions that create a hostile or uncomfortable atmosphere for employees.
The aim of promoting such a culture is to foster a supportive, respectful, and inclusive work environment, where individuals can collaborate effectively, communicate openly, and feel valued, regardless of their role or background
If any individual, regardless of their position, acts in a way that discourages open debate then it’s up to the organization’s leadership to address their behavior and help them correct their ways.
Making vast adoption a priority - if the vast majority of an organization accepts and implements the concept of ‘strong opinions, loosely held’ then a few individuals won’t be a problem. Yet without wide adoption, such a concept could lead to a small minority speaking in confidence while the rest only observe quietly.
In such situations, leadership, of course, can’t make anyone voice their opinions confidently. However, they could prod other medium-to-high confident employees to voice their opinions and challenge potentially bombastic individuals.
It’s unlikely for an entry level employee to follow the GM’s lead by imitating their behavior. Most people take cues from colleagues they feel close to (personally and professionally). Therefore, when facing adoption issues, ideally, we’d like to spread the culture from the more senior (often more confident) to the rest of the organization in a top-down manner.
Confidently expressing your opinion has plenty of benefits, personal and professional ones. By now, you probably know how strongly I feel about it. If by writing this post I managed to help a single person adopt stronger opinions, then it was worth it.
But if instead I get even a single person to draw my attention to why I’m wrong then it’s almost better. Sure, it might make me question a few things, but that’s progress, I guess.
Bird, Charles (1917-01-01). "From Home to the Charge: A Psychological Study of the Soldier". The American Journal of Psychology. 28 (3): 315–348. doi:10.2307/1413607.