On this page
Meeting room, choosing between two options. Anna opens with her own preference and only then asks the team. Amira has chosen something different on her notes.
— I’d go with A. But what do you all think?
— A works — Amira says after a pause.
Anna believes she has opened the discussion. Amira believes the correct answer was given before the question was asked.
How does Empatyzer help leaders avoid steering the team's answer?
Empatyzer helps you see that the leader is asking for your opinion, but first provides your own answer. This makes it easier to understand how status affects the team's voice and the quality of decisions.
Features that can help:
- Your leadership style: Helps you see how you naturally influence people, make decisions and respond to disagreement, which is important in a "You asked after giving the answer" situation.
- You vs. the team: Provides a reference point for the "You asked after the answer" situation: shows whether you are similar to the team or clearly different from it in areas such as leadership status, speaking up and influencing decisions.
- Talk to Em about your team: Allows you to discuss the "You asked after answering" issue with Em in the context of the entire team and establish a shared rule that prevents similar misunderstandings in the future.
What really happened
Anna genuinely wants the team’s view, but before asking for it she says what she would choose as CEO. To her, this is simply being transparent about her own opinion. To Amira, it is also a signal about what the most senior person in the room is likely to want. Formally, the question is still open. Psychologically, the range of answers can suddenly feel narrower. Amira may have a stronger alternative and still decide that the social cost of disagreeing is greater than the benefit of raising it. Anna did not ban criticism. Her opinion only had to become the reference point against which every other answer was measured.
What the research says
The first piece of information people encounter can influence later judgments and discussion — the anchoring effect. Research suggests that groups can also become anchored on early reference points (de Wilde, Ten Velden & De Dreu, 2018). Separately, research on employee voice shows that hierarchy changes how willing people are to express a different view, while leader behavior can either raise or lower the perceived cost of speaking up (Pfrombeck et al., 2022; Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006). Together, these findings help explain why “What do you think?” asked after the CEO has stated a preference is not the same question as “What do you think?” asked before it.
How to handle it
If a leader truly wants independent judgments, collect them before revealing the leader’s own. Better still, ask people to write down a recommendation briefly before the discussion starts. You can also invite a specific challenge: “Give me the strongest reason my option might be wrong.” Saying “you’re allowed to disagree” helps less than building a process in which disagreement has a real place. The general rule is: if you want an independent opinion, do not set the answer before you collect it.
How Empatyzer and Em can help
Empatyzer can show Anna that asking for opinions may not be enough when her position and communication style make her own recommendation a powerful reference point. The assessment can surface differences in comfort with hierarchy, independence, and willingness to disagree openly. By comparing Anna’s and Amira’s profiles, Em can anticipate that the CEO’s view may carry more weight than Anna intends. Before the meeting, Em can suggest a simple change of sequence: collect independent answers first, then share your own. If the same pattern appears more broadly, team-level insights may reveal that some people routinely wait for the leader’s signal instead of contributing their own view. Micro-lessons reinforce a practical habit: if you genuinely want to hear someone else’s opinion, make room for it before showing them yours.
Sources
- Julian Pfrombeck; Chloe Levin; Derek D. Rucker; Adam D. Galinsky (2022). The hierarchy of voice framework: The dynamic relationship between employee voice and social hierarchy. Research in Organizational Behavior, 42(Supplement), 100179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2022.100179 10.1016/j.riob.2022.100179
- Ingrid M. Nembhard; Amy C. Edmondson (2006). Making it safe: the effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7), 941-966. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.413 10.1002/job.413
- Tim R. W. de Wilde; Femke S. Ten Velden; Carsten K. W. De Dreu (2018). The anchoring-bias in groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 116-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.001 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.001
Find an article
Enter at least 2 characters. Minor typos are OK.