Listening for a Change creates openness — and safety — in order to surface and explore thoughts, feelings, and worldviews.

Why is it so hard to change people's minds? There are countless books and seminars that attempt to explain why — and then tell us how to be convincing, or how to mount an effective argument. But arguing is often not the best way to change minds, no matter what the technique.

Advice on influencing others generally focuses on enhancing our ability to convince. Formulas for making a compelling argument range from Aristotle's Rhetoric to Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People. While a skillful argument can be a productive approach to influence, there are times when even the most articulate advocacy falls on deaf ears — or worse, encourages and fortifies opposition. Consider, for example, a political campaign ad attacking a candidate you strongly support. Will it convince you to change your mind, or cause you to dig in your heels?

Two researchers in the areas of Psychology and Organizational Development provide important insight into the challenges of changing people's thinking: Chris Argyris and William Bridges.

From Chris Argyris' work in Overcoming Organizational Defenses, we learn that the way we see the world is the result of self-reinforcing patterns of thought that ultimately distort how we take in information. The information we pick out from the world seems to constantly strengthen what we already believe is true. Have you ever marveled at how often you seem to be right about things?

Once we form a belief, a thought process that Argyris calls "the reflexive loop" takes over. The reflexive loop acts like a valve: it lets in data which corroborates our beliefs, while shutting out data inconsistent with our preconceptions. The reflexive loop accelerates the hardening of our emerging beliefs into deeply held convictions that get incorporated into our worldview.

William Bridges, who has written extensively on people's reactions to change, notes that people don't experience "change" per se. Instead, people move through a psychological process he refers to as "transition." Transition, according to Bridges, starts with an ending, with a "letting go of something." What we generally take to be resistance, according to Bridges, is really an emotional reaction to confronting the possibility that something we count on is going away. The absence of the familiar makes change frightening, not the imagined new reality. Consider for a moment how much you depend on your worldview to help you make sense of what you encounter each day. Most of what comprises your worldview has been set since your childhood, and is responsible for who you are and how others see you. Some of your worldview came on board more recently. The more central your worldview is to your self image, the scarier it would be for you to acknowledge the possibility that, without modification, it no longer serves you. We learn from Bridges that it's hard to change someone's mind, because of the fear of losing an important mechanism for how one makes sense of the world.

Taking the research of Argyris and Bridges together, it's a miracle people ever change their minds about anything. On the one hand, the reflexive loop ensures that our experiences reinforce our beliefs. On the other hand, confronting the possibility that an aspect of our worldview no longer serves us means facing a fear of loss: the more central the belief, the more profound the loss.

Yet, we know that people can and do change their minds. If it's possible to alter our own thinking, it should be possible to alter the thinking of others. In fact, it turns out that substantive mind changing depends on a paradoxical supposition: we can influence someone's worldview only to the extent that our approach includes the possibility of altering our own worldview. Said another way, when our mind's made up, the minds we interact with don't change either.

How to be less convincing and more influential

Equating influence with the ability to convince limits your options by at least half. An alternative worth considering I'll call "Listening for a Change." If convincing means "to win over," then Listening for a Change means "to collaboratively explore." I characterize the difference by considering the intention or mission of the person seeking influence: