Curiosity: ask before you defend

Someone pushes back on the process you rolled out, and the reflex arrives before the thought does. Defend it. Explain the reasoning again, point to the meeting where everyone agreed, hold the line. Defending feels like competence in the moment, and it ends the conversation exactly where it started, with you knowing nothing new.

There is a name for what that reflex protects. When evidence threatens a position you own, you do not weigh it neutrally, you recruit arguments against it, a pattern the psychologist Ziva Kunda called motivated reasoning. The alternative is to ask a real question first, and that is harder than it sounds, because a genuine question means admitting a gap in what you know.

The gap is supposed to be uncomfortable

George Loewenstein’s information-gap theory describes curiosity as a feeling of deprivation [1]. It starts the moment you notice the distance between what you know and what you need to know, and the noticing itself is unpleasant. That discomfort explains the pull toward defending. A confident answer closes the gap instantly, it just closes it with whatever you already believed.

Brené Brown makes the same point for managers, that choosing to be curious means choosing to be exposed [2], which is why leaders skip it. And the fear that questions make you look weak runs backward. Studies of workplace conversation find that people who ask more questions, especially follow-ups, are rated more likable and more competent, not less [3].

What asking first buys you

A team member says the new process slows them down. Defend the rollout and you keep the procedure but lose the adoption. Ask “walk me through where it slows you down” and you find the one redundant step that was souring the whole thing. A number in this week’s report jumps and contradicts the story you told last month. Push back on it in the room and your team learns that only convenient numbers are safe to bring you. Ask “help me understand how this is calculated” and you find someone changed the definition, and your team learns you would rather have the real number than a flattering one.

The openers are cheap. “Help me understand.” “Tell me more.” “Walk me through it.” “What am I missing?” Each one trades a little status now for information you can act on, which is the better end of the deal every time.

Curiosity also has a clock. It comes before the decision, not instead of it. Ask your questions, then decide, and own the decision. What you give up is the comfort of being right immediately. What you get is being right where it counts, out where the work actually happens.

Sources

Loewenstein, information-gap theory of curiosity — cmu.edu
Brené Brown on armored vs. daring leadership — brenebrown.com
Brooks & John, “The Surprising Power of Questions” — hbr.org
Gino, “The Business Case for Curiosity” — hbr.org