His conclusion was as simple as it was powerful: when the desire for agreement exceeds the desire for truth, collective intelligence collapses. That is why organisations that value harmony over honesty end up being less innovative, less adaptable and, often, less successful. In innovation, this happens more often than it seems: the team falls in love with their idea too quickly and no one wants to be the ‘killjoy’ who raises objections.
Criticism is confused with a lack of commitment, which is why certain cultures or leadership styles are incompatible with the most disruptive innovation.
Three classic approaches
- The devil’s advocate: a figure who deliberately seeks out the weak points in an idea. The term originates from the Catholic Church, where, before canonising someone, an advocatus diaboli was appointed whose job was to find all the arguments against the person’s sainthood.
- Constructive dissent – questioning with respect and rigour as part of the process. In certain leading companies, it is considered a key skill.
Today, I am going to give you some simple guidelines for incorporating it into your toolbox as a leader of innovation teams.
- Create a culture where it is safe to disagree. And when I say safe, I mean safe, without the need for anonymity.
- Assign the critical role in every relevant decision.
- Rotate it: everyone must go through it.
- Base the debate on evidence, not hierarchy.
- Document the lessons learned.
Remember that the goal is to think better together. Innovating is not about agreeing, it’s about seeing beyond. Well-managed dissent is an invisible accelerator of innovation.
Conclusions
In summary, the most innovative and effective teams do not eliminate
