I prefer "weak opinions, strongly held", as in, "I don't know. And I am pretty sure you don't either." Won't sell me any books, but it's been my experience.
‘Strong Opinions, Weakly Held’ Doesn't Work That Well
21–30 of 175 posts
Re: ‘Strong Opinions, Weakly Held’ Doesn't Work That Well
#22I prefer "weak opinions, strongly held", as in, "I don't know. And I am pretty sure you don't either." Won't sell me any books, but it's been my experience.
On the other hand, when faced with a fork in the road, it's important to choose. Often it doesn't matter which - but if you vacillate, and especially if you are leading - then you can fail by not choosing. So, strong opinions: decisively go down one road; weakly held: turn around if information suggests it looks like the wrong road. You can only update your opinions if you engage with reality, which demands a certain…
But you can also fail by choosing wrong and sticking to that conviction too long.
I think the whole point is that how strong your opinion is and how strong you hold it are insufficient to know if you will fail or succeed.
Re: ‘Strong Opinions, Weakly Held’ Doesn't Work That Well
#23I prefer "weak opinions, strongly held", as in, "I don't know. And I am pretty sure you don't either." Won't sell me any books, but it's been my experience.
On the other hand, when faced with a fork in the road, it's important to choose. Often it doesn't matter which - but if you vacillate, and especially if you are leading - then you can fail by not choosing. So, strong opinions: decisively go down one road; weakly held: turn around if information suggests it looks like the wrong road. You can only update your opinions if you engage with reality, which demands a certain…
The number of times people think they are at such a fork where non-action is worse than any action is an order of magnitude more than in reality.
In my experience, most of these cases are reflective of a social issue. The problem at hand doesn't require one make a decision any time soon, but if you don't, you are viewed negatively. So the social systems around you push you to make a decision even when one is not needed.
Almost every time I've heard someone use the phrase "fence-sitter" it is this scenario. At my work, we have surveys where we rank things on a 5 pt scale: 1 is strongly against, 5 is strongly in favor, and 3 is neutral. There's a significant block of people who keep pushing HR to make it a 4 point scale so there is no neutral option. I've had several discussions with them, and they've never been able to give me a good reason, beyond statements like "You have to have some opinion!" and some negative comment about fence sitters.
But yes, for certain things (e.g. investing for retirement), it's probably better to pick a safe option than not pick anything.
Re: ‘Strong Opinions, Weakly Held’ Doesn't Work That Well
#24I prefer "weak opinions, strongly held", as in, "I don't know. And I am pretty sure you don't either." Won't sell me any books, but it's been my experience.
Re: ‘Strong Opinions, Weakly Held’ Doesn't Work That Well
#25But it's not - people don't accept that what they were told previously is no longer correct. A good example is the current arguments around mask wearing. By originally saying don't wear masks, that has stuck and a lot of people think either you lied originally or you don't know what you're talking about - ideas made worse by being promoted for political gain.
Re: ‘Strong Opinions, Weakly Held’ Doesn't Work That Well
#26There's a type of exercise where you're not asked "I want to do $x, how do I achieve that?" but instead are asked "I don't know what to do, can you find out?" where the scope might be anywhere from "pick an new ERP" to "reorganise the entire worldwide operations to be a more effective at all things digital". If faced with such a wide open question you could do some research and start asking all the questions you thin…