Cultivating Intellectual Humility in Leaders: Potential Benefits, Risks, and Practical Tools
Clinical providers have recognized the power of humility in their work. For example, a grassroots efforts of medical professionals and community leaders listening and responding with humility to people’s vaccine skepticism has been credited with bridging the substantial racial gap in COVID-19 vaccination status in recent times.1 There is a growing interest in humility in the health and well-being professions literature.2 Leaders may be particularly interested in learning more about humility because leader humility fosters trust, engagement, creative strategic thinking, and better organizational performance.3–5 Beyond general humility, the subtypes of clinical humility, cultural humility, and professional humility have been explored in the health professions literature.2 A newer addition to this list is intellectual humility, which has been the center of a deluge of theoretical and empirical work over the past decade across a number of fields.
So, what is intellectual humility? Intellectual humility is understanding and accepting that what you know and believe could be incomplete or even inaccurate. In the field of psychology, intellectual humility is typically defined as recognizing one’s intellectual limitations, though interpersonal features, such as appreciating others' intellectual strengths are often also included.6 As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to rapidly shift how we use technology and as employees’ stress and burnout are at peak levels, there is no time like the present to emphasize the importance of intellectual humility for leaders. Among leaders, intellectual humility might manifest in practical ways such as refraining from being overconfident about your perspective or ideas simply because you have the best credentials in the room, soliciting and carefully considering others’ descriptions of problems and solutions, being willing to change your mind on the basis of new information, and not feeling emotionally threatened when others (including those in more junior positions) contradict your knowledge or beliefs.
In this paper, we explore the potential benefits of intellectually humble leadership, acknowledge the risks of being an intellectually humble leader, and share practical ways leaders might cultivate intellectual humility within themselves and their spheres of influence. Leaders influence organizational climate and followers’ behavior through role modeling7–9 and by influencing followers’ values and identities.10 As leaders give themselves and others permission to admit their intellectual limits and mistakes, they will create an atmosphere in which followers can feel safe and empowered to do the same.
The Benefits of Intellectual Humility for Leadership
Theory
Recent research on intellectual humility echoes the existing wisdom of health and well-being professionals that inflexibility in thinking is a barrier to successful leadership. As described by Kerfoot,11 a leader in the nursing profession, when leaders become entrenched in their typical ways of thinking (even those ways that launched them into success), they “begin a slow descent into their death as a leader.” That is, leaders who lack the intellectual humility to realize their knowledge is imperfect will overlook innovative models of leadership, disregard new ideas, stop pursuing training, fail to appreciate new information, and neglect others’ feedback. Becoming a better leader requires inviting intellectual dialogue and challenge. Further, when leaders model intellectual humility, it creates space for followers to recognize that their feelings of uncertainty are legitimate and need not be feared.
Though intellectual humility likely benefits leaders in many contexts, three scenarios relevant to health and well-being professionals are worth mentioning. First, intellectual humility may be particularly helpful to health and well-being professionals who work in collaborative care teams. Working with cross-discipline professionals requires acknowledging the limitations of one’s own knowledge domain and valuing the knowledge and intellectual contributions of others in order to provide the best services.
Second, intellectual humility may be key in promoting practices that engage vulnerable communities who have faced health and well-being disparities and implicit bias or discrimination in their contact with health and well-being systems. By leading with intellectual humility, we create organizations and communities that look beyond the dominant discourse of society to hear, acknowledge, and value the wisdom of local discourse surrounding health and well-being. In these ways, intellectual humility can promote more diverse groups and organizations where a true sense of belonging results in more voices being heard. Ultimately this will create safer settings for those with marginalized identities to receive health and well-being support.
Finally, health and well-being companies have a large financial incentive for supporting professionals who are likeable and good communicators. These qualities may involve creating an atmosphere of intellectual humility. For example, primary care physicians who solicit patients’ opinions, encourage patients to talk, and engage in active listening are less likely to be sued.12 These behaviors will come more naturally for professionals who are high in intellectual humility.
Empirical Findings
Research has begun to build on these ideas by exploring the empirical outcomes of intellectually humble leadership. The findings, though extremely limited in scope, are beginning to suggest particular mechanisms by which intellectual humility benefits leadership. First, intellectual humility promotes follower-centered leadership. A study of novice community leaders indicated that those who became more intellectually humble when transitioning into a new leadership position were subsequently better at taking a follower’s perspective, were emotionally empathetic toward followers, and engaged in more servant leadership.13
Second, leader intellectual humility has been linked to more favorable views of leadership among followers. For example, research using hypothetical scenarios revealed that when leaders ask questions instead of immediately sharing their own conclusions, they are viewed as more humble, which results in leaders enjoying more trust and helping intentions from followers.3 Further, in a community leadership context, followers’ ratings of satisfaction with leadership was related to their leaders’ intellectual humility.14 The characteristic of intellectual humility that stood out as most important was leaders' respect for others' viewpoints, involving appreciating that there are diverse ways of thinking about topics and being able to respect those with different views. Not surprisingly, these qualities were central to followers being more satisfied with their leaders' interpersonal leadership. It also increased followers' satisfaction with their leaders' justice orientation. In this study, valuing others' viewpoints was a more robust predictor of leadership outcomes than leaders' more general appreciation for others' strengths, suggesting that intellectual forms of humility are key to effective leadership in addition to more general forms of humility.
Third, intellectual humility provides a tool for repair when leaders break trust. It seems not a week goes by without new headlines about leaders caught in scandals. Intellectual humility is key to rebuilding relationships under such circumstances. A number of studies have shown that people are more willing to forgive a religious leader following a major offense and treat said leader with respect when they view the leader as intellectually humble.15,16 In fact, viewing leaders as intellectually humble is even more important than viewing them as humble in general, when it comes to people’s willingness to forgive leaders for breaking their trust.15 What’s more, intellectual humility in the area of the leaders' expertise may be particularly meaningful when leaders commit a transgression relevant to their area of leadership. That is, when religious leaders offended people in the area of religious beliefs and values (for example, telling someone they would go to hell for not following a particular religion) compared to offending people on a topic unrelated to their leadership domain (for example, finances), it was all the more important for those who had been offended to view the religious leader as being intellectually humble about religious beliefs and values in order to be willing to forgive the leader.15 Perhaps people who view their leaders as intellectually humble may have greater hope that their leaders will learn from mistakes, make corrections, and do better in the future. These ideas reflect the social oil hypothesis of intellectual humility.16 That is, when leader-follower relationships are strained by leaders’ lapses in judgment, intellectual humility can provide the social oil that prevents the relationship from breaking down completely.
Are There Risks to Being an Intellectually Humble Leader?
We’ve noted some important reasons leaders may benefit from increasing in intellectual humility. However, leaders can also find themselves in a Catch-22 when it comes to expressing intellectual humility. As with general humility,9,17 there are social expectations about who should express intellectual humility and in what social contexts. To date, there is some empirical suggestion that leaders may be viewed more negatively if they display intellectual humility. Most of this work is based on people’s perceptions of hypothetical scenarios. Findings include that leaders admitting they don’t know something can cause them to be viewed as less competent, which can further result in lower trust in the leader and less desire to help the leader.3 In the same vein, when leaders change their views on moral topics, they are more likely to be viewed by followers as hypocritical, ineffective, and not worthy of support.18 We might understand these findings on the basis of role congruity theory, which suggests leaders will experience social sanctions if they act in ways that are considered atypical for leaders. Under this assumption, if intellectual humility becomes more of a norm for leaders, it will be more easily welcomed. In addition, the status incongruity hypothesis suggests leaders will experience sanctions if they engage in socially proscribed behaviors. Following this hypothesis, leaders who serve in organizations and communities that struggle to accept leader fallibility may experience more backlash when expressing intellectual humility. Under this scenario, a cultural shift in leader expectations may be needed.
It is important to recognize that the role congruity theory and the status incongruity hypothesis apply not only to leaders as a global category, but also allow us to think about norms and expectations for particular subgroups of leaders. Typically underrepresented leaders such as people of color and women may operate in a narrower range of social acceptability when it comes to intellectual humility and therefore experience the most risk. To compare to general humility, research suggests female leaders are more likely than male leaders to be viewed as incompetent, insecure, or weak when expressing humility and, yet, more likely than men to be viewed as negatively “overcompensating” when they do not express humility.9 Based on this, we might expect leaders who are women, racial or ethnic minorities, younger than their direct reports, or in low positional power or organizational rank to face precarious expectations when it comes to their intellectual humility. On the one hand, they may be more likely to be viewed as being of humble status and therefore needing to display intellectual humility; simultaneously, their intellectual humility may be more likely to be misread as incompetence. Research is needed to evaluate these hypotheses. In the meantime, it is worth noting that developing intellectual humility in leaders is not about stifling leaders’ expertise, knowledge, or power. This can be an important concern for champions of diversity, equity, and inclusion, who shudder at the idea of telling underrepresented leaders to be more humble. More work is needed to examine how genuine intellectual humility might make all leaders more effective, influential, and dynamic, for example, because acknowledging that they have blinds spots is likely to increase their curiosity, intellectual creativity, and genuine interest in others’ intellectual contributions. These qualities may build follower buy-in, loyalty, and energy so that their teams accomplish more.
Based on the noted risks, what might be a relatively safe way to practice intellectual humility as a leader? Asking questions may be a good start. Asking questions geared at gaining knowledge does not result in leaders being viewed as less competent unless a leader’s competence is already in question on the basis of weaker credentials.3 Plus, asking questions comes with the bonus of being viewed as more humble, which has positive effects on trust and helping behaviors directed toward a leader.3
We will note one additional caveat: a study has suggested intellectual humility might result in worse well-being for leaders in some contexts.19 Specifically, religious leaders' religion-specific intellectual humility, meaning their awareness their religious beliefs might be wrong, was associated with worse mental health, but only among religious leaders who were low in general levels of humility.19 This suggests general and intellectual humility may work together in intricate ways. General humility and intellectual humility are not only both important to leaders, they are important together.
A crucial question is whether we should expect intellectual humility specific to a leaders' area of expertise to be associated with negative outcomes outside of the religious domain. In the noted study,19 awareness of the fallibility of religious beliefs was associated with more emotional strain in religious leaders’ relationship to God, which is what accounted for worse mental health. Thus, these findings may not generalize to leaders in other settings.
Cultivating Intellectual Humility
We have explored some potential benefits and risks of being an intellectually humble leader. For leaders who would like to become more intellectually humble, where should they start? First, research on this topic is very limited, making it difficult to offer recommendations with confidence. Here we offer some tentative suggestions for leaders who would like to cultivate intellectual humility in themselves and those they lead.
Addressing Individual Barriers
Admitting your intellectual limits and errors can be challenging for anyone, but may feel particularly threatening to those charged with leading others, who are praised for their confidence and persuasive powers. Barriers to enacting intellectual humility can include a fear of being perceived as weak or ineffective and difficulty reconciling intellectual humility with being assertive in decision making. This can be compounded by the imposter phenomenon. We often hear leaders, especially women, express the fear that being intellectually humble is in conflict with their need to prove their competence to demonstrate they deserve their position of leadership. Fortunately, many of these seeming-contradictions are, in fact, not mutually exclusive. Being intellectually humble does not mean a person is less confident,20 less intelligent,21 or viewed as less intelligent by others.22 In fact, people tend to like those who are intellectually humble22 and, as noted above, intellectual humility can increase followers’ views of leader effectiveness.14 Thus, some of these barriers to intellectual humility may surround personal fears about how intellectual humility will play out in a leadership role rather than a true incompatibility between intellectual humility and effectiveness. To help leaders explore and process their personal views of and barriers to expressing intellectual humility, we have provided some questions for thought or discussion in Table 1.
Table 1.
Personal Views of Intellectual Humility: Questions for Thought and Discussion.
Describe a time you witnessed a leader demonstrate intellectual humility. What effects followed for the leader, team, and organization? What was your reaction to the situation?
Describe a situation in the recent past when you displayed intellectual humility as a leader. What were the outcomes?
Describe a situation in the recent past when you did not display intellectual humility as a leader. What were the outcomes?
What experiences have made you more intellectually humble as a leader? How has this impacted the nature of your leadership?
Kerfoot suggested a lack of intellectual humility in a leader begins a slow descent into their death as a leader. What are your reactions to this idea?
What do you find appealing about becoming more intellectually humble in your leadership?
What benefits do you think you or your team would experience from demonstrating more intellectual humility?
What do you find unappealing about the idea of becoming more intellectually humble as a leader?
What barriers do you face when thinking about being more intellectually humble as a leader?
What risks would you or your team face from increasing your intellectual humility? Are there unique risks associated with facets of you identity (eg, race, gender, age)? Are there unique risks specific to being intellectually humble about your area of expertise?
Addressing Contextual Barriers
Beyond individual trepidations about intellectual humility, leaders may find themselves operating in an organizational culture that values confidence and undermines vulnerability. These cultures can be influenced by the particular industry or field. For example, creative industries—where there are few limits on ways of doing things—and technology industries—where information develops at lighting speed—may foster the recognition that leaders always have more to learn and others’ expertise to rely on. We can compare this to natural sciences—where questions often have a correct answer—and professions in medicine or academia—where status and power are tied up in title, rank, and tenure, often delineated on the basis of intellectual achievement. In such settings, intellectual humility may feel more challenging. In addition, leader intellectual humility can be difficult for followers to accept when they prefer the reassurance of infallible expertise.23 This sentiment may be heightened in uncertain situations, such as a pandemic or organizational crisis, when individuals look to their leaders for expert guidance in the midst of countless unknowns.
A long-term goal for minimizing contextual intellectual humility barriers includes a cultural shift on all levels of an organization or community to open space for those in leadership positions to express greater intellectual humility. This is supported by vignette-based research suggesting that people who are higher in intellectual humility themselves are less likely to view leaders who change their minds negatively.24 Table 2 offers questions for leaders to reflect on the expectations they experience within their field, organization, or community regarding intellectual humility and ways in which they can create positive contextual change for others to feel freer to express intellectual humility.
Table 2.
Intellectual Humility and Contextual Factors: Questions for Thought and Discussion.
How is intellectual humility viewed in your particular industry, field, or organization? How might this be a reflection of the ways in which knowledge is related to power?
What negative repercussions, if any, have you experienced when you expressed intellectual humility in your field, organization, or community?
Think about a time a direct report expressed intellectual limitations or mistakes. How did you respond? What were the results?
What spoken or unspoken messages or observable artifacts are present in your organization that discourage people from admitting their uncertainty or lack of knowledge? What would beneficial change in these messages look like? How can you contribute to positive change?
Applied Exercises
Table 3 offers suggestions of exercises leaders might try in order to increase intellectual humility within themselves and the individuals they lead. Some of these ideas have been supported by initial empirical evidence (Part I) and others are theoretical in nature (Part II). Of note is that longitudinal studies suggest people’s levels of intellectual humility may not change much over the course of a year or more on the basis of leadership experience14 or education,25 through other research has shown factors associated with small changes in intellectual humility over time.26 This implies that substantial change in overall levels intellectual humility may be challenging to achieve—though research examining interventions with this goal is underway. An additional approach is to encourage greater intellectual humility on specific topics or issues rather than aiming to change people’s overall levels of intellectual humility.25 Examples of specific issues in workplaces include optimizing employee experience, remote vs in-person work policies, and unlimited time off policies. Table 3 offers suggestions that can be applied on general (knowledge in the abstract) or specific (topical) levels.
Concluding Thought
Cultivating intellectual humility in leaders will likely involve challenging some assumptions surrounding intellectual humility as has previously been done for general humility.27 As leaders express more intellectual humility, they provide opportunities for others to see intellectual humility at work in positive ways. In this way, leaders are uniquely positioned to create a culture of greater intellectual humility in their organizations, industries, and society at large.
