Flexibility - opinions may bend whilst convictions may break

It is quite common for a professional to face a dilemma when in disagreement with a plan or decision. Going for flexibility demonstrates how open she is to collaborate and commit, even believing there is a better, or at least a different, solution to the matter. However, it sometimes means to go against the grain.

Many leaders consider their duty to make their opinion prevail, either entirely or at least as the cornerstone of the candidate solution. The bright side, to start with one, is that the urge to make themselves listened immensely contributes to accelerate their capacity to come up with some useful ideas. As a side effect, a feeling of discomfort and annoyance grows from inside while waiting for holding the reins of the discussion.

A couple of years in the past, as information was a tremendous asset, the ones who had the privilege to access it played an important role as thought influencers. In the current era of abundance, with data being accessible anytime to everyone, a myriad of points of view naturally emerge and diverge in pretty much all the meetings. Collaboration and collective intelligence took the place once occupied by power and information domain. In this scenario, where someone’s opinion is just one more, it is exponentially easier and more powerful co-create than convince others she has the solution.

The toughest question, though, lies in identifying when and how much flexible I must be. Even not having the killing answer, I have been practicing something I learned from a conversation with an inspirational leader: seek to influence no higher than 40%. You don’t need to be precise on that. It’s a matter of measuring the strength of your interference. Going distant from the baseline to less, indicates you are preventing others to know what you think and that you care about the topic. On the other side, by going too high you are trying to prevent others from showing they care and you from knowing what they think.