Over the last couple of weeks, we’ve been exploring curiosity as both a leadership behaviour and a strategic operating system for uncertainty. We looked at how better questions improve thinking, and how curiosity helps leaders stay cognitively open under pressure.
This week, we’re going to look at a third dimension that often goes overlooked. Curiosity doesn’t just shape how leaders and teams think, it shapes how people relate.
This article explores curiosity as a social force: the glue that holds high-performing cultures together. It influences how teams handle conflict, respond to difference, and stay connected when the pressure is on.
The spiral of give and take
In high-pressure environments, relationships can fray. We risk becoming transactional and often focus more on being right than being connected.
But curiosity acts as a buffer against this fragmentation. Research show that people who are curious are viewed as more interesting and engaging by their peers. Why? Because they prioritise being interested over being interesting.
When we ask questions, we create what Todd Kashdan, Professor of Psychology at George Mason University, calls the “spiral of give and take”. The give and take we’re talking about is not just being polite. Instead, it changes the mechanics of conflict.
In one study involving competitive tasks, participants who scored high in curiosity were significantly less aggressive than their peers. When given the chance to “punish” their partner with a blast of noise, the curious participants chose lower intensities and shorter durations.
The implication for leadership is significant. Curious people engage more in perspective taking. They are more likely to wonder why a colleague is behaving a certain way, instead of rushing to judgement. If you want a team that butts heads less, and collaborates more, working to foster more curiosity is a great way to start.
Lessons from a vanishing elephant
If curiosity protects relationships, it also powers the specific type of cognitive processing required for innovation. This is illustrated in a study that utilised the story of Harry Houdini. In 1918, Houdini performed a famous stage stunt in which he made a 10,000lb elephant disappear.
Researchers split participants into two groups. The first was told that the mystery was unsolved. The second was given a likely explanation (a curtain), that removed ambiguity.
When asked to develop their own magic tricks later, the “certainty” group tended to settle for safe, unoriginal ideas. But the group primed with the mystery engaged in a process known as idea linking. They didn’t stop at the first answer, and instead worked to continually build on their initial thoughts. This ultimately led to more creative solutions.
There’s another lesson for leadership here. Leaders who perform certainty (in other words giving immediate answers to shut down ambiguity), inadvertently kill the idea linking process. Leaders who are able to restrain this impulse are better able to maintain the mystery trigger and the iterative thinking that can lead to breakthroughs.
The chemical advantage behind curiosity and wonder
Idea linking ultimately occurs because the brain is rewarded for it. As we’ve covered in previous blogs, curiosity is a biological state. When we’re curious, our brains release a potent cocktail of dopamine, serotonin, and endorphins.
And this chemical state does much more than make us feel good. It actually primes the hippocampus for learning. Studies show that when we’re curious, we’re 30% more likely to recall information (even details we weren’t actively trying to learn).
That’s why priming a team before a briefing is critical. If a leader starts with a curiosity hook (a gap in knowledge or a surprising problem) they release this combination of chemicals and help to ensure the information that follows sticks.
The paradox of AI and curiosity
Finally, a note on the tool that is reshaping all of our work lives and cultures (and one we’ve written about extensively in our recent whitepaper): AI.
This technology is creating a paradox. It gives us instant breadth of knowledge, but if used incorrectly, it can risk robbing us of depth. Neuroscience tells us that a degree of “struggle” is required to build strong synaptic connections. If teams slip into using AI too heavily as a cognitive crutch, then they totally bypass the level of struggle required to really understand a concept or issue. The risk is in developing a culture of only surface level understanding.
Of course, this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t use the technology (quite the opposite), we just need to be conscious of how we’re using it. In many cases, it’s best used as a tool to spark more questions, not just end the inquiry.
A trainable muscle
The most important takeaway is that curiosity is not a fixed personality trait, but a state that can be cultivated. Even if you don’t naturally feel curious (and who does all of the time?), you can still model curious behaviours. Research shows that the mere act of asking an open-ended question often triggers a genuine interest in finding the answer.
Curiosity can be the social glue that binds teams, the chemical primer than boosts memory, and the spark for innovation. If you’d like to learn more about cultivating curiosity in yourself and in your teams, get in touch.