One of my favorite of all the 214 tips, techniques, and ideas in my book When in Doubt, Ask for More is also one of the shortest. It simply reads: “Speak your truth, and speak it boldly. But don’t confuse it with the truth.” I have used these words many times, especially as a kind of preamble when I facilitate meetings during which important matters must be decided.
As far as I can remember, I made this saying up at some point about a decade ago to reflect my evolved thinking on the value of robust debate in nonprofit decision-making. I may have adapted it from something I heard or read long ago, but I can’t recall it – otherwise I would give the originator credit.
These words are consistent with another of my beliefs about how people should participate in the deliberations of boards of directors they serve on: speak your mind and vote your conscience. (For a summary of my top ideas and resources on nonprofit governance, click here.)
Early on in my career, I felt quite differently. Most of the time, I saw dissent and debate among my colleagues and on the Grameen Foundation board as unnecessary distractions. It was not so much that I thought that I was always right and therefore that I shouldn’t be challenged – though I did succumb to such hubris on occasion. Rather, I felt such urgency about getting things done that taking the time to argue for and against different options seemed like a luxury we couldn’t afford as we bootstrapped Grameen Foundation from a tiny organization into a reasonably large one.
Over time I got comfortable with people expressing disagreement with me or with others, since it often led to better decisions and greater support for whatever course we took. As a result, I started encouraging everyone to not just express their opinions – or their “truth” about a matter – but to do so boldly and confidently, rather than sheepishly or apologetically. If they had been included in a group, even if they were a relatively new or junior person, I came to believe that in a well-led and governed nonprofit organization, it was both their right and responsibility to do so.
However, I noticed that some people were more graceful at expressing dissent than others. One way I came to think about this is that skillful dissenters retained a bit of doubt that what they were saying could be wrong. In other words, they didn’t confuse their truth (at a given moment in time) with the truth. They had conviction, but remained curious and open to better ideas. Or, to paraphrase Adam Grant, they argued like they were right but listened like they were wrong. Such an attitude made it easier for others to in turn disagree with them. And this iterative process of discernment often led to the best and most widely supported group decisions being made.
The most effective way to inculcate such an approach is to model it yourself in a group setting. I can’t say I always get that right, but it remains my north star. And while I believe it is relevant in many contexts, it is especially important in mission-driven environments where feeling that you have the permission to speak up and shape decisions is often more highly valued than in corporate or government settings.
To read all of my other top 213 success strategies for nonprofit leadership, pick up a copy of my book When in Doubt Ask for more today by clicking here.