Opinions should take time to form, yet time is so precious. That feels like a tension worth exploring. It does however mean that this thought piece won’t offer you a unique approach to any particular area of branding or marketing, nor will it talk, at least not directly, about the building and development of effective teams. Still, I hope you’ll humour me and read on. It’s in the spirit of ‘G & Biscuits’ that I offer you this biscuit-nibbling repose for thought and I hope this gives you as much pleasure to read, as it has for me to write.
I’m struck by how often people offer their opinions, then swiftly move on, yet this should come as no surprise. I’d rather that than a world bereft of opinion entirely. Can you imagine a night down the pub where the banter offers nothing as to how people feel the world should or should not be? Instead, just an ongoing reel of descriptions about what they see, without so much as a word about what it led them to think or feel. The alternative is, however, equally scary. The statement ‘in my opinion’ often goes hand in hand with some of the worst human behaviours, driving apart, rather than bringing together. Perhaps this is exactly why we see some people nursing their own pints in solitude; it’s so much safer to avoid ill-thought out opinions, instead choosing to sink inside our own mind and enjoy a far more personal discourse.
Narrowing the lens a little, my focus here is on opinions of consequence, rather than simple matters of taste. By opinions of consequence, I mean opinions that have the potential to shape the well-being of humanity, even in the smallest of ways. That’s not to say opinions of taste aren’t interesting. Far from it! On the contrary they’re wonderful catalysts for human connection. However, they don’t lend themselves to the same social dangers that opinions of consequence do, and if you think your opinions hold little or no consequence, I suggest you think again. The reality is, especially in today’s socially networked society with all its multitude of communication mediums, we all have influence. We all have an audience, and at the pace the world moves now, many often take opinions at face value, rather than pausing to critique them. You don’t have to be the President of the United States (an apposite example, given the torrent of ill-considered opinions expressed through social media from the recently departed) for your opinions to influence others. It’s worth considering to what extent your opinions are taken as fact by your audience, and to what extent you actively encourage people to critique your position. Opinions should come with this responsibility, yet rarely do.
Opinions should come with this responsibility, yet rarely do
All too often, people state that they’re ‘entitled to their opinion’, in order to simply close the conversation down. Ultimately, in doing so we do our interlocutor a disservice, essentially demeaning their ability to put forth a rational argument worthy of our time - and perhaps that’s exactly the thought going through our minds. ‘I haven’t got the energy. It’s not worth it...they’re not worth it.’ However, putting intentions aside, surely such entitlement mustn’t just be empty. An opinion of consequence surely needs to carry experience and consideration to be of any value. If we are to express our opinions, should we not equally be bold enough to state quite clearly the level of consideration that has gone into forming them? Maybe it’s just a simple tweak to our modern day vernacular that’s required. Something to indicate whether the opinion is based on reading a tweet from a relative unknown, or the culmination of 10,000 hours of blood, sweat and tears. Quite clearly, the two are so very different yet they often get treated similarly. Perhaps a wider array of adjectives that improve on the binary nature of ‘highly- or poorly-informed’, offering a more granular grading system, could perhaps propel us forward as an intellectual species. This new grading system may not significantly enhance the way we exchange ideas in of itself, but it could shine a light on the underlying motivations. It might encourage society to reflect, as I hope this piece does, not just on the opinions we have and how well they were formed, but also more importantly, how we hold onto them when sharing with others.
But time is short, or so we believe. Today, more than ever, there is this sense that we have little of it to spare. Precious little time to hold on to curiosity and hold one’s opinions lightly. It’s a double whammy; no time to form opinions and no time to debate and shape them. Or perhaps worse, no inclination or desire to do either.
I was struck by an article about Dame Elen MacArthur and her work around circular economies (‘a new economic system in which we design out waste and pollution, keep products and materials in use, and regenerate natural systems.’) She started out with an opinion around the importance of circular economies (unsurprisingly, 71 days, 14 hours, 18 minutes, and 33 seconds circumnavigating the globe in solitude gave her time to think!) and their role in the future of humanity, but she held onto that strong belief lightly, inviting input. She spent the following years interviewing and discussing circular economies and associated sustainability theories with all walks of life, including experts in science, business, art, climate and beyond. She even formed a foundation committed to creating a circular economy. In so doing, she recognised that opinions must not be static. They’re formed in the now, based on current knowledge, but life rolls on. To drive action, they need to be shared and discussed, and so evolve. Static opinions will swiftly be proved out of date if they don’t, with the holder moving from highly-informed, to poorly-informed, just through the passage of time.
opinions must not be static. They’re formed in the now, based on current knowledge, but life rolls on.
When opinions go beyond the individual to a network, they’re freed from that entropy. By creating her foundation, her opinions constantly evolved, becoming more considered, more relevant and more powerful. Choosing to form the foundation and engage with others ensured that her opinions became the result of multiple disciplines. In a way, they then transcended the ‘well-informed’ 10,000 hours of a single individual, and became diversely informed - 10,000 hours2 - with input and consideration from multiple perspectives. All the time, she held onto her strong beliefs lightly and appreciated that the complexities of opinions about the state of the world always extend beyond a single field of expertise. Beyond a single individual. For example, the world’s most informed virologist can offer a highly-informed view on the efficacy of lockdown programs to combat a virus, but only through a virologist lens. They’re far less informed about associated mental health implications, unless of course they’re engaging in rich, respectful conversations with experts in those fields and are willing to listen.
All this curiosity and openness of course takes time, and if we’re falsely drawn into the idea that we have none, then such rich diversely-formed opinions will only occur as a rarity. However, as Seneca states in The shortness of life, ‘It is not that we have a short space of time, but that we waste much of it.’ We need to choose what matters and invest our time accordingly. I think holding our strong beliefs lightly and taking the time to explore opinions with respect is really, really important for humanity. It’s worth the time. Far more so than playing ‘Candy Crush’. I know that’s a huge ask, and so I’d like to offer a reframe which perhaps makes it easier to swallow.
Assuming you buy into the idea that we should all be life-long learners, then choosing to slow the pace down actually means that we learn more. Every discussion around an opinion, if lightly held, becomes a learning opportunity. Indeed, that’s how opinions ought to be considered. Not as a chance to get your point of view across, but to develop them by being open to others. The phrase ‘Strong beliefs, loosely held’ or variations on that theme, has got a bad rap in some communities, but only because it’s misunderstood. The tensions to be enjoyed here are between conviction and humility, leading us to want to better understand others so that we can better understand ourselves; ‘Help me appreciate how you’ve formed your opinions, and I’ll share with you how I formed mine.’ If life is about experiencing the world (including the thoughts and feelings of others within it) then going slow here actually opens us up to a wealth of new experiences! If someone has a point, it’s not that you concede a point by acknowledging its validity, as if this were some battle of intellects. Rather, you refine your points together, and are both richer as a result. Opinions ought to be paired with humility, listening and consideration.
This all points to diverse, respectful group discourse. The alternative - undiverse, disrespectful projections (the worst side of ‘I’m entitled to my opinion’) - will, I think, lead to our ultimate demise. In a bid to bring us back full circle then, I’d like to draw your attention to a theory of the esteemed German sociologist and philosopher, Jürgen Habermas, who essentially believed that, with the right human contract, (I would suggest that in essence, this is a contract of diverse, respectful group discourse) the world’s problems could be resolved down the pub. I paraphrase and distort horrendously, but hopefully nevertheless, you get my point. Changing the way we hold our opinions as we sit round a table, enjoying a drink with friends and strangers alike, could lead to truly progressive thinking, and ultimately, progressive action. And perhaps in doing so, together we can prevent the demise of the local drinking hole too.
Look, it’s just an opinion! What’s yours? Pint anyone? A pint of Pedigree for me please.
If my words have inspired you to inject purpose into your brand and people, let’s talk! Book a free 30 minute chemistry call on zoom
I like your analysis and it chimes well with my mantra that "if you want to change the world, first change yourself". However in the business context we must also change others. Therefore it is about establishing by example an culture that values rational decision making. It is the nature of business that most decisions must be made by authority because there is too little information available to support rational decision making but where there information available teams should use to inform their actions.