This week’s post builds on last week’s idea to move from production to construction by getting to know ourselves. However, while we may know ourselves, we desire that others understand us too. I argue that we do not always try hard enough to understand each other and that doing so is crucial for flourishing teamwork and leadership. Other people are unable to understand what is going on in our minds until at least a few words have been spoken. We can’t accurately guess each other’s thoughts and feelings, even if we sometimes make assumptions.
The mind contains an individual’s feelings and thoughts, to which only that person has immediate access. Others cannot directly perceive these internal experiences. Our thoughts and feelings are hidden to other people but clearly visible to us. As such, other people may easily misunderstand our actions, decisions, choices and ideas, and even our whole academic journey. Such misalignment can create unnecessary conflicts, broken collaborations, difficult teamwork, and lead to feelings of isolation or leadership practices that silence instead of empower. I can’t deny that it is tempting to assume that others know what we mean. A colleague, for instance, might believe their commitment to a project is obvious through their actions, yet somebody else may interpret their silence as disinterest. Similarly, a student may stay silent during a seminar – not because they have nothing to say – but because they may fear that their voice isn’t good enough.
We should also question the cultures that normalize such silences. Professional academic environments often celebrate production, efficiency, certainty and the resulting decisiveness. These values do not leave us with space for vulnerability and reflexive thinking. But what if flourishing teamwork and leadership need the opposite – patience, openness, courage and the willingness to simply admit that we do not always know everything? Learning to express what is in our minds, therefore, means legitimizing voice that is exploratory, uncertain, pluralistic and sometimes simply messy. It subverts pressure to solely speak when we have ‘produced’ something efficiently. Voicing our thoughts is, thus, not a one-directional act. It is not enough to speak because there must be someone willing to listen. This isn’t always easy because the practice of ‘speaking-up’ is often imposed without that there are conditions where speaking is safe or meaningful. Leaders may ask for feedback but ignore what they hear if it does not please them. Institutions may encourage a plurality of voices but only when they align with established dominant norms and priorities. Voicing what is in our minds, therefore, needs to be accompanied by responsibility to respond with respect, even when what is said is uncomfortable and not on our individual agenda.
This means that expressing our inner world is also a deep act of trust. When I choose to share my uncertainty, I am trusting that the listener will not weaponize my vulnerability against me but simply ‘be with’ me. When a student shares their challenges or struggles, they are trusting that we will not see them as less. Trust is fragile, but it is the foundation of genuine understanding. Without it, expression and voicing becomes a mere productive performance – a compliance with the need to ‘be transparent’ instead of fostering meaningful dialogical exchanges. Therefore, if we are returning to the theme of moving from production to construction, expressing what is in our mind should not be reduced to simply producing more words, emails or meetings. Instead, it is about constructing meaning together. This constructive approach is crucial for our academic lives. Research is not only about showing off outputs, it is about how and why we are constructing knowledge collectively through reflection, critique, questioning, and one of my favourites – imagination! Yet, our academic culture often rewards the polished outputs instead of the vulnerable process of voicing our thoughts. By learning to express what is in our minds, therefore, we resist the pressure of ongoing productivity and instead highlight dialogue as a form of co-construction.
Of course, learning to express ourselves is not easy. There are barriers that are political, structural, cultural, personal and professional. Structural barriers include dominant hierarchies that value our conformity and workloads that leave us with little time for reflective dialogue. Cultural barriers, for instance, include values and norms that privilege certain languages or accents or ways of speaking over others. Personal and professional barriers may involve fear of rejection, lack of confidence, or marginalization. So, when individuals express what is on their minds, and others actively listen teams can flourish. Misunderstanding become smaller while creative ideas emerge, and conflicts can be addressed and circumvented before they escalate. Leadership becomes less about top-down command and more about collective facilitation – constructing spaces where people feel safe to voice their perspectives. The emphasis then is on the willingness to hear what is in the mind of others and to interweave these voices into a shared, collective direction.
We challenge you this week to practice expressing what is on your mind. Not to strive for perfection but to be honest and open about how you feel. Invite others to your inner world and offer them the same care when they invite you to theirs. In doing so, we can shift closer to constructing not only knowledge or our institutions, but also relationships that allow us to simple be and flourish.