Why Does Curiosity Matter in a Culture of Certainty?

Insight

In policy and public service, the pressure is on to deliver fast, cost-effective results.

But when it comes to complex challenges—like housing, education, or health—the honest answer is often: we don’t know yet.

That can be a hard thing to say, especially under pressure.

But it’s also the answer that opens the door to curiosity; and it is curiosity that drives innovation, creativity, and—ultimately—solutions that work.

In high-stake environments, it may feel like we don’t have time to be curious.

The truth is, we don’t have time not to be.

Insight in Practice

In government, the real challenge often isn't how to be curious—it's understanding why it matters in the first place.

So let’s start with the why.

Why encourage curiosity in a culture of certainty?

Social impact leaders are expected to have answers, not questions. This creates what Harvard's Amy Edmondson calls "psychological safety deficits"—environments where questioning established practices feels risky.

Yet this certainty bias is precisely what allows problems to escalate.

Consider the 2008 financial crisis. Government regulators had access to warning signals for years, but our culture of certainty prevented critical examination of assumptions.

Additionally, research by Irving Janis on groupthink shows that high-stress, high-stakes situations increase the need for curious leadership. When teams feel pressure to reach quick consensus, they're more likely to suppress dissenting views and ignore warning signals.

The simplest way to start building a culture of curiosity.

Effective curiosity frameworks are multi-layered and require customisation, but there is a simple way to ignite curiosity starting right now, and it is this:

Institutionalize the "What if we're wrong?" question.

Make it a formal, recurring practice in every significant decision and meeting. Not as a throwaway line, but as a structured process where team members and stakeholders are allowed to argue the opposite position and tell you what you're missing.

Curiosity isn't about having a curious personality—it's about creating systems that force curiosity even when you're stressed, rushed, and convinced you're right.

Perspectives

Curiosity-led reform is how Finland transformed its public education system.

In the 1970s, Finland's education was mediocre. Rather than importing solutions from high-performing countries, Finnish leaders embarked on a decades-long inquiry process. They asked fundamental questions: What is the purpose of education? How do children actually learn? What conditions enable teachers to be most effective?

This curiosity-driven approach led to counterintuitive policies: fewer standardized tests, more autonomy for teachers, and less homework. The process was anything but fast, but the results were worth it. Finland consistently ranks among the world's top education systems.

“The new system was introduced gradually, starting with Northern Finland in 1972, “which was considered to require the reform most, and to resist it least”, and it reached the rest of the country by 1977.”—Education Reform in Finland, Centre for Public Impact

Of course, too much curiosity - without direction - can paralyze progress. Barry Schwartz calls this the paradox of choice. When encouraging curiosity, we must ensure we use the right frameworks.

“The existence of multiple alternatives makes it easy for us to imagine alternatives that don’t exist—alternatives that combine the attractive features of the ones that do exist. And to the extent that we engage our imaginations in this way, we will be even less satisfied with the alternative we end up choosing. So, once again, a greater variety of choices actually makes us feel worse.”―The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less, Barry Schwartz

Question to Consider

Where has confidence in the solution held your team back from asking better questions?

Quote of The Week

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.”
— Stephen Hawking