Creating personal clarity and conviction on an issue can occur in two distinct ways: People can think through the issue by reading, listening, and contemplating where they stand on the topic and then speak, OR they can talk out loud and clarify their views through their own words and through the dialogue they create with others.
In other words, we can Think-to-Talk or we can Talk-to-Think.
While people often vary in their approach, they generally have a tendency to prefer one style of reaching personal conclusions over the other. Not surprisingly, leaders and team members are often impatient with those who use a different style than they prefer. In team meetings, those who Think-to-Talk can appear overly calculated and unwilling to fluidly explore ideas, whereas those who Talk-to-Think can come across as unpolished and unprepared to articulate a view.
Think-before-they-speak types collect their ideas, assess their convictions, and then express them in a cogent way. They prepare their thoughts and contemplate what they believe before they speak. They naturally choose their words more carefully and try to be succinct in their advocacy.
This style suggests people should keep their thoughts under wraps until they have something specific to say. As a result, team members who Think-to-Talk sometimes seem measured or slow to contribute, or front-loaded with views irrespective of the discussion.
In contrast, those who prefer to learn what they think as they talk need interaction to gain clarity and conviction about what they believe. They are often surprised by what they say and how the dialogue shapes their views in real-time.
They relish talking things through and the learning that comes from rapid-fire exchange. Being verbose or unrefined doesn’t bother them because without talking they can’t figure out exactly what they believe. Because they know others can become impatient with their need to speak to learn, they often warn others that they are “thinking aloud here.”
In group meetings, those with a strong preference for one style can become impatient with those who employ the other style, often believing efficiency and effectiveness are at stake when this isn’t the case. The best leaders, who have their own preference of course, exhibit patience for both styles. They recognize that differences in how team members go about thinking and speaking are a strength, not a weakness.
Patience for those with a competing style begins with understanding your own preference. Are you a Think-to-Talk or Talk-to-Think leader? Perhaps, we should think about that or just talk it through.
A Daily Dispatch from the Front Lines of Leadership.
