The Dumbest Guy In The Room

Fischer head shotby professor innovation management IMD Business School Bill Fischer – By now, everyone reading this knows (or should know) that you never want to be the so-called “smartest guy in the room.” Surround yourself with smarter people and you’ll all win. More ideas, more energy, more connections, smarter people make smart people even more successful.

But, what about being “the dumbest guy in the room”? Ever think of that? Have you ever aspired to be the one who asks the dumbest questions? In fact, we think that someone has to do this in order to take most conversations to a higher level, and yet most of us instinctively shun such a role to the extent that it often never happens, and we’re all the poorer for it.

In the spirit of the idea that in innovative teams roles are more important than positions, I have been experimenting with a variety of roles intended to move conversations ahead faster and bolder than might otherwise have been the case. My good friend Nadine Hack, CEO of beCause Global Consulting, has frequently played the role of agent provocateur, in team settings, ensuring that the “elephants in the room” remain hidden no longer.

She does her homework before entering into a team discussion as a “designated impolite person,” and then ensures that the “unmentionable” rises to the surface so that it can be dealt with effectively in order to raise the likelihood of project success. The agent provocateur role is not one typically found on any list of formal positions, nor innovative team roles, but it has served us well over many important strategy conversations. There is nothing dumb about this role however. To get to “dumb” you have to insist that somehow somebody plays the role of “the dumbest guy in the room.”

Among the suggestions were several that were truly stunning for their naiveté:
  • Is all of this necessary?
  • Why can’t an extremely well perceived customer experience ever go hand-in-hand with the lowest cost ever?
  • Will our colleagues enjoy delivering this plan?
  • Why is our Net Promoter Score not more important than free cash flow?
    And my favorite:
  • How come we expect the XYZ market to grow here when it’s declining in the U.S.?

Recently, when working on a strategic planning exercise with the top-team of a market-leading European media and technology company, I was inspired by Warren Berger’s A More Beautiful Question, to ask the leadership team to, anonymously, pose the dumbest question imaginable to the planning group, in the hopes of achieving a “late-inning” correction to a strategic plan already in motion.

Each of these questions go straight to the heart of what should have been included in the planning process. Yet, none of these questions would ever be raised in a normal planning meeting, because they appear to be really “dumb,” or at best “naïve,” for a seasoned executive in a complex organization to raise, especially when the plan is poised for release within the organization. Yet, each of these questions contains a kernel of a potentially transformational idea, if only they could be heard.

In A More Beautiful Question, Berger quotes the late polymath, and Nobel laureate, Bertrand Russell as saying: “In all affairs it’s a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you take for granted,” and, he further cites behavioral science scholar David Cooperrider’s observation that: “organizations gravitate toward the questions they ask.” How better to ensure the “health” of an organization than by asking questions so powerful that they require everyone present to reflect on the very essence of the organization and its situation as a central element of important decisions, rather than rushing pell-mell to execution?

The moral of the story is: don’t ever let anyone tell you that “there are no dumb questions.” There certainly are dumb questions, and you want some of them on your side. Whether it’s having a role-player responsible for raising naïve questions, inviting “naïve experts” into your conversation, or even scheduling an exercise to generate such questions, you want to be the one to raise them before the market does.

————–
Bill co-founded and co-directs the joint IMD / MIT Sloan School of Management program Driving Strategic Innovation.  This article was originally published by Forbes.com where Bill authors a regular column, The Ideas of Business.
{ 14 comments… add one }
  • Peter Cook (@AcademyOfRock) February 13, 2016, 6:48 pm

    Naivety is a precious commodity in many situations of helping people and it is vastly underrated in all but the greatest companies. It can be learned and some of the world’s best experts have a skill of starting afresh.

    Reply
    • Bill Fischer February 18, 2016, 5:22 pm

      Thanks Peter, I agree completely. I’ve had some success designating people to play this role, and when they do it right it becomes a great asset to helping a team think more innovatively about the situation that they are addressing.
      Bo;;

      Reply
  • David Wilcox February 13, 2016, 6:54 pm

    Always wondered about affinity with Nadene from the start–now I understand Bill thanks. We are both “designated impolite persons” who and ensure that the “unmentionable” rises to the surface so that it can be dealt with effectively….. Loved your point that–The agent provocateur role is not one typically found on any list of formal positions, nor innovative team roles, but it has served us well over many important strategy conversations. There is nothing dumb about this role however. To get to “dumb” you have to insist that somehow somebody plays the role of “the dumbest guy in the room”.

    I really enjoyed the read and agree with the moral:

    The moral of the story is: don’t ever let anyone tell you that “there are no dumb questions.” There certainly are dumb questions, and you want some of them on your side.

    Reply
    • Bill Fischer February 18, 2016, 6:04 pm

      Thanks David! You’ve said it well, and I’m delighted that you responded so positively to it.
      Bill

      Reply
  • Andrea Learned February 13, 2016, 7:22 pm

    I love this – “in innovative teams roles are more important than positions” – talk about DISRUPTIVE… ! The leader who is wise enough to pose (and that may mean “plant”) the dumb questions reflects so much human behavior and group dynamics’ awareness. The “dumb” questions will get to the root of the big issues so much faster. Thanks for this reminder, Bill!

    Reply
    • Bill Fischer February 18, 2016, 5:24 pm

      Thanks Andrea, This comes from some work that I did for a book entitled “Virtuoso Teams,” where we saw real role-fluidity at work in the most innovative teams. In almost every case, in addition, there was “naive expertise” that was consciously added into the conversation to create a bit of an extra “kick” to the conversations.
      Bill

      Reply
  • Barbara Brooks Kimmel February 14, 2016, 2:50 pm

    Great article Bill! Would be happy to always be the designated “asker” of dumb questions!

    Reply
    • Bill Fischer February 18, 2016, 5:27 pm

      :-)) Thanks Barbara,
      one lesson that I’ve learned from Nadine Hack is that to play this role best, you need to be extremely well-prepared, so that your “dumbness” is recognized as an “insider’s strength”.
      Bill

      Reply
  • Nadine B Hack February 14, 2016, 2:59 pm

    Love Bertrand Russell quote: “In all affairs it’s a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you take for granted”

    Reply
    • Bill Fischer February 18, 2016, 5:28 pm

      Nadine, no one does this better than you! “The Amazing Nadine” is well-earned!
      Bill

      Reply
  • Cortney February 15, 2016, 7:01 pm

    I love this reframing of “dumb” questions (i.e., the need for them). Thanks for the courage of this piece, Bill. :)
    Best, -Cortney

    Reply
    • Bill Fischer February 18, 2016, 5:30 pm

      Hi Cortney,
      Thanks! Actually, this article has been sitting in my mind for quite some time without being recognized. It’s sort of the self-evident truth that is hard to see. What finally brought it to life was the exercise that I mentioned where I demanded a top team actually generate their “dumbest” questions, and they were liberated by the exercise!
      Bill

      Reply
  • Ravi Chaudhry February 16, 2016, 1:18 pm

    Bill – you are amazing. Whenever I read your piece, it stays in my mind till I can come to terms with it. It is the same this time.

    It occurs to me why it should be the privilege and the prerogative of only the dumb, to ask a dumb question, particularly when such questions can be so impactful.
    I look forward to a scenario when the “smart” should be equally capable of asking a dumb question. In fact, I would even suggest that only those who can do so are really, really smart. What is your view on this?

    All the best —- Ravi

    Reply
    • Bill Fischer February 18, 2016, 5:57 pm

      Hello Ravi,
      Thanks very much for this! I’m a great admirer of yours, as you know, so this is a particularly pleasant moment!
      I think that you’ve aptly characterized the “sociology” of this dilemma in your question. When “dumb” questions are asked, they are often spot on target, but since they so often challenge the leadership’s wisdom, they are also a fast way to earn a troublesome reputation. Perhaps the reason for this is that they are typically asked so late in the process that they have a high nuisance cost to even deal with?
      As I’ve argued, I think that we should recognize such “dumbness” as an organizational asset and invite everyone to participate. If we do this early enough in the decision process, we can make important strategic corrections without much worry. However, in order to do this, we need to really practice “inclusiveness” and “transparency,” and not regard them as the erosion of power.
      I hope that this addresses your concerns.
      Bill

      Reply

Leave a Comment