7 minute read
Curiosity, Misinformation and Being a Better Leader
I recently received a forward from a close and trusted friend about a missile strike by Russia against Ukraine, the newsletter had the following sentence in the opening paragraph:
“Only close war watchers know that on Thursday, the Russians quietly obsoleted modern warfare and most of the West’s defensive arsenal. This changes everything.”
At the risk of not wanting to spread misinformation to my audience, I will not quote the source.
How many times a day, as a leader, do you receive messages like this from your team, clients and partners? In a world heavily based on the attention economy, I would bet it happens more often than it doesn’t. These types of statements can be incredibly dangerous at all levels, especially for businesses, because of their ability to manipulate and drive actions that are not based on facts. In short, misinformation drives action based on feelings vs facts, an incredibly dangerous recipe in today’s high-stakes world of leadership.
Before we throw up our hands or convince ourselves that this would never happen to us (because, as we all know, nobody is immune to misinformation), let’s get curious and unpack what is happening to be better prepared to recognize it when we come across it.
Using the example of the Ukraine War headline as our test case, let’s explore five tactics that influence how you may or may not react. They are:
- Evoking fear & urgency
- Leveraging authority and exclusivity
- Simplification of complex issues
- Emotional manipulation
- Call to reaction (not reflection)
Evoking fear & urgency
Fear and urgency grab attention by triggering deep-rooted survival instincts. While these reactions once helped humans survive, our brains struggle to differentiate between a real threat, like a lion in the grass, and a perceived threat, such as a sensational headline.
A simple yet relatable example of this would be how a single tweet about market downturns can lead to massive sell-offs. Not because the information is credible but because it triggers fear and the instinct to act quickly. Before reacting, ask yourself: Is this fear valid? What immediate evidence supports this urgency? Am I reacting to a fact or a feeling that the information created?
When you feel a sense of urgency, take a moment to pause, write down your immediate reaction, and then revisit it after ten minutes or more. This simple trick can help re-engage your logical mind and allow you to get curious about your reaction.
The ability to react under pressure and in the moment can be a trademark of a strong leader, it can also be the note on a tombstone of someone who leaped before they looked.
Leveraging authority and exclusivity
“Only close war watchers” implies exclusivity, making you feel like you’re gaining privileged knowledge. This taps into a natural tendency to trust specialized information—but beware of implied authority, as it can lead to decisions based on incomplete or inaccurate data.
One example of this I run into professionally is when working with a vendor, and they make claims such as “Only our clients have access to this proprietary software” or one of my all-time favourites, “This is what the experts recommend.”
This begs the question of references, supporting data and other unbiased sources. Never be afraid to ask for proof because it is relatively easy to come by if something is truthful.
A bonus concept to be aware of is the idea of “lost language,” an example of words being used that we apply our meaning to. The simple word “expert” may mean a PhD researcher to you, and it could mean a junior consultant to someone else. Beware of your brain’s tendency to fill in the blanks.
Simplification of complex issues
Bold, oversimplified statements often give a false sense of clarity about complex issues. In our Ukraine War example, there isn’t much information about what exactly occurred, just that it ‘changes everything’. War is one of the most complex human endeavours, and to boil it down to a headline over simplifies its complexity and nuances.
For leaders, oversimplification of complexity can lead to poor decisions when deeper understanding is required. In today’s information-saturated world, shortcuts like thin slicing are tempting but risky when stakes are high.
If you are unfamiliar with the concept, I highly recommend “Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking” by Malcolm Gladwell. Thin slicing refers to making quick decisions based on limited information. The trick when it comes to thin slicing effectively as a leader, especially under pressure, is being able to recognize what information to ignore or minimize while at the same time knowing where to dig in. Statements like the Ukraine War headline above are a perfect example of simplification of the complex in a way that may lead you down the wrong path of understanding.
I am a fan of thin slicing as a way to navigate the world, but like any tool in your toolkit, it is knowing when and when not to use it. Thin slicing is effective in low-stakes or familiar situations, like assessing a team member’s energy or buy-in during a quick meeting. However, oversimplifying data can lead to costly mistakes in high-stakes decisions, such as entering a new market.
A very simple structure that I have used is breaking the issue into “what we know (facts),” “what we assume (our bias),” and “what we need to find out (the gap).” This can truly put things into context and guide the next steps.
Emotional manipulation
Emotionally charged language is a powerful tool often used to bypass rational thinking and provoke immediate reactions. It preys on instinct, leveraging fear, outrage, or excitement to shortcut logical decision-making. For leaders, this manipulation can derail thoughtful decision-making and create ripple effects of confusion or mistrust across teams. To counter its influence, it’s essential to understand how emotional manipulation works and how to stay grounded in logic and inquiry.
Ask yourself: “What emotion is this triggering in me?” “Is there credible evidence to support this claim?” “Who benefits from my reaction?”
Taking a step back can re-engage your rational mind and shift from reacting to reflecting. Reframing the narrative is another powerful strategy. Instead of acting on the emotional pull of a message, focus on gathering more information and involving your team.
Questions like: “What assumptions are we making here?” or “What additional data do we need?” can diffuse heightened emotions and guide decision-making back to logic and clarity.
Emotional manipulation thrives on unchecked reactions. Strong leaders recognize its presence, slow the impulse to act, and lead with thoughtful curiosity. This approach strengthens decision-making and creates a culture where logic and reason take precedence over impulsive responses.
Call to reaction (not reflection)
Above all, I find this one to be the most dangerous when it comes to leadership missteps. Many leaders I work with, including myself, tend to be bias-to-action individuals, which is an incredibly powerful character trait until it slips into reaction. When leaders react too quickly, they risk creating a chain reaction in their teams—misdirecting resources, causing confusion, or damaging trust.
In the context of the Ukraine War headline, “This changes everything” leaves the reader on a note of action or alarm, encouraging them to do something—share the information, panic, do something rash, or the one that we actually need to do: investigate further.
Its deliberate avoidance of detailed explanation forces the audience to seek additional context, often from the message’s source. The argument is that additional and separate sources of truth must be added to the mix before we reach any state of readiness to act.
When faced with urgency, ask: “Who benefits from me acting now?” “Is this timeline externally imposed or self-created?” “What additional information do I need to verify the claim?”
Effective leaders balance action with reflection, ensuring decisions are informed and purposeful. Building this balance helps teams avoid unnecessary confusion and, even worse, lost money and time.
Leaders face an endless barrage of emotionally charged messages designed to provoke, manipulate, and demand action. This constant noise creates an environment where thoughtful reflection is replaced by reaction—and reaction can be costly.
But there’s an antidote: curiosity.
Curiosity transforms reaction into reflection, fear into understanding, and urgency into deliberate action. It’s the ability to pause and ask questions, to dig deeper when presented with bold claims, and to empower your team to think critically. As leaders, when we model curiosity, we create a culture where misinformation loses its power and decisions are guided by clarity and reason.
Here’s your challenge: start small.
The next time you encounter an emotionally charged message, pause. Write down your immediate reaction and revisit it ten minutes later. What changed? You can also engage your team. Bring a current issue to your next meeting and ask your team to dissect it using the “facts, assumptions, and gaps” framework. I also invite you to build habits by incorporating reflection into your decision-making process. Create space for your team to question, explore, and challenge assumptions without fear of judgment.
The stakes are too high to lead by instinct alone. By fostering curiosity in yourself and your team, you create an environment where decisions are informed, purposeful, and impactful. This isn’t just about being a better leader; it’s about empowering those around you to navigate complexity with confidence and care.
Leadership isn’t about knowing all the answers—it’s about asking the right questions. Pause, reflect, and lead with intention.
Stay curious!