Transformation Principle: Dissent

I recently listened to a panel on which Scott Atlas and colleagues offered terrific points of view. Here are some of my takeaways.??

• The norm in science is questioning. Isn't science all about questioning? We must embrace dissent!
• Truth is not determined by consensus. Scientists have an obligation to challenge the uniformity of the message! We must have public discourse and embrace dissent.
• Know the data, question it, and be a critical thinker.
• Blind or rote advocacy and submission to authority positions often lead to bad decisions.
• Truth is not determined by the number of people who agree. It is determined by debate and proven or disproved through discussion of the evidence.
• Censoring different views and disagreements leads to less effective decisions.
• When you delegitimize people who ask questions or offer a dissenting point of view, you create an illusion of false consensus and cause others to self-censor, which harms the organization's health.
• Recognizing a hypothesis and debating the learning determines whether you have good evidence.
• In science, the norm is not unanimity. It is questioning.

After listening to the esteemed panelists, I couldn't help but think that their points of view apply to creating an innovative culture that can drive transformation. Evidence discovery, using the discipline of scientific discovery, should be the standard practice in innovation and transformation. Great innovators should be a lot like scientists. We must be evidence-driven and willing to question ourselves and each other. As leaders, we must legitimize opinions rather than delegitimize them.??

The doctors also spoke about rule by authority. I do not believe this is an effective leadership style. Authority-based decisions should only happen after significant debate and harnessed consent to capture enough evidence to force a decision. And when that decision is made, the leader MUST own the accountability. How often have we read that some leaders believe they are right if they have title-based authority? Sometimes, these leaders mistake dissent for negative and consent for alignment. Embracing authority as the declarer of truth accepts an underlying assumption that the authority opinion is based on facts. Basing a decision on a title or position of power without testing for evidence is tomfoolery.

Employees should feel safe offering a dissenting view if they don't understand, agree with the supposition, or have no evidence. Dissent is not dissension! Dissent is disagreeing with an opinion, especially the majority/consensus opinion. Dissension is persistent disagreement within the team and even becomes ill-natured. I propose that the lack of harnessing dissent erodes dialogs into dissension because teammates believe that is what it takes to be heard.

In the work for innovation and transformation, our system must be the Faneuil Hall of Debate and the center for exchanging free ideas, whether they agree or dissent. How many projects have been a colossal waste of time and money because we didn't have the culture that made it safe to dissent? If you have an employee who dissents, that employee is there to help offer a view that might be at variance with the consensus, but remember, consensus doesn't determine truth. I suggest we pursue evidence through data debate, assumption testing, and relentless dissent until we align based on criteria before moving forward. Organizations do have the time and money not to take this approach.

For my upcoming book, The Innovators Journey, a colleague shared that her boss said to her, "You are pushing back," after she asked clarifying questions. She reminded him that she was seeking clarity so the team could move forward effectively. He then said, "Your team doesn't need clarity. They just need to embrace my vision." He told her the team was not her currency but was his to allocate. He clearly demanded consensus to an authority. Remember, when you delegitimize people who ask questions or offer a dissenting point of view, you create an illusion of false consensus and cause others to self-censor, which harms the organization's health. You may believe you have an aligned team, but you likely don't. Consensus by authority isn't leadership.

Back in 2020, a survey asked people to score this phrase regarding doctors and hospitals: "Trust a lot." 71.5% of people chose "trust a lot." In January 2024, only 40% chose "Trust a lot." Could it be that during that time, the opportunity to dissent and ask questions also declined? I propose it did. So what to do?

1. Harness dissent.?
2. Celebrate questions that lead to deep conversations.
3. Legitimize people who question assumptions, directions, and directives.
4. Dismiss the behavior or belief that a title coronates any of us as the holder of truth.
5. Articulate the do's and don'ts of great leaders and hold leaders accountable for harnessing debate rather than rewarding them for the allusion of consensus.??

Let's have the dialog!??