Think Again by Adam Grant
“We listen to views that make us feel good, instead of ideas that make us think hard.”
3 Main Messages:
“The purpose of learning isn’t to affirm our beliefs; it’s to evolve our beliefs.”
The way to find a compromise is all about the dance and the questions we ask
It is possible to move from binary ways of thinking and step into the grey middle zone
Recently I met some lovely Californians on holiday and we got into a conversation about luxury resorts. They mentioned Capella in Singapore (a beautiful hotel) and I noted that this was the location of the 2018 summit between Kim Jong Un and Donald Trump. They were intrigued. “Yes,” I joked, “There’s still a scorch mark in the ground where lightning struck as they shook hands.” It was met with a twitching silence - we didn’t hear from them again.
Our world feels increasingly polarised and I am no exception to the rule when it comes to jumping to conclusions about people based on the way they have voted and then shutting down conversations if I disagree with them. We find it more comfortable to operate in silos and so fall victim to both confirmation bias and desirability bias whilst missing out on opportunities to be curious and learn something new. Afterall, as Grant tells us: “Disagreements don’t have to be disagreeable”
Think Again is written based on the philosophy that “the purpose of learning isn’t to affirm our beliefs; it’s to evolve our beliefs.” It opens with a devastating story about smokejumpers and how they needed to completely change their thinking in order to survive in an emergency. Grant points out that often our beliefs become confused with our identity - people will loyally support a team and vote for a political party blindly because that’s just ‘who they are.’ We tend to cling to old ideas because learning we have been ‘wrong’ can feel uncomfortable.
But we HAVE to learn to evolve our thoughts in order to survive. Blackberry and Blockbusters (UK video rental service) are just two of many examples of highly successful companies who clung to their brilliant ideas and ultimately failed because they refused to change with the times.
The book is split into three sections. In the first, Grant shares more examples like this and encourages us to think ‘like scientists’, being curious and asking for evidence. He takes us through the Dunning-Kruger model and warns of the perils of overconfidence when we actually know very little about something. It has been said before that ‘a little knowledge is a dangerous thing’ and Grant warns us against getting “stranded at the summit of Mount Stupid.”
He writes that the antithesis of this is to be humble, curious and open. Many might struggle with the concept of leaders being humble, as the traditional stereotype of leadership is in strength and confidence. But Grant argues that these can be combined and that “confident humility doesn’t just open our minds to rethinking - it improves the quality of our rethinking.” He also writes about the power of turning imposter syndrome into a fuel for greatness, and argues for the necessity of creative tension in the workplace.
In the second section, there are some wonderful real life stories which demonstrate the power of interpersonal re-thinking: how being curious and asking great questions can bring people from the black and white extremities of an argument into the middle grey area in order to find common ground. Grant refers to this as the ‘dance’ and talks the reader through the 4 steps of motivational interviewing which I can see would be invaluable when broaching workplace (or personal) disputes.
Finally, Grant writes about the importance of psychological safety, which he defines as: “Fostering a climate of respect, trust and openness in which people can raise concerns and suggestions without fear of reprisal.” He shares some brilliant examples of how one teacher taught students to question knowledge in the classroom and then starts to unpick generally accepted ways of thinking, including previous assumptions around EQ and IQ.
I particularly enjoyed the epilogue, where Grant demonstrates the editing and rethinking process that went into writing the book. It perfectly demonstrates the work of Ron Berger and his colleagues, referred to in the previous section, in teaching editing skills to students using Austin’s Butterfly. By revisiting, rethinking and asking curious, non-accusatory questions, we can learn so much more and make huge improvements.
Now I just need to work on my tone of voice when I next meet a staunch Republican and ask “Why did you vote for Trump?” Let the dance (and the learning) begin!
