Management's willingness to hear the signals

My professional insights · Lyudmil Karaulanov · 6 min read

Published: 1 August 2026 · Version 1.0

It is difficult to listen to a warning about a decision in which you have already invested effort and authority. Especially when you have promised a result, the team has begun work and time is pressing. Your first reaction may be irritation, even if you ordinarily value openness.

For me, willingness to listen begins with acknowledging this difficulty. We do not need to like what is said or agree immediately. We need to stay in the conversation long enough to understand whether the other person sees something we have missed.

Why is it sometimes easier to hear an outsider?

An adviser stands outside everyday relationships and the hierarchy. Their objection may be accepted as professional judgement, while the same thought from an employee sounds like opposition.

This difference deserves attention when an external analysis repeats something the team has already been saying. The adviser's value may lie precisely in helping internal knowledge to be heard. But it would be unfortunate if the organisation needed an outsider's authority every time it considered its own observations.

What do people learn from our reactions?

If good news receives attention while uncomfortable news triggers a search for someone to blame, the team gradually changes how it speaks. Some people will wait for more evidence. Others will soften the risk. Still others will discuss the problem only among themselves.

The absence of objections may then be mistaken for agreement. That is why I am also interested in people who no longer contribute to discussions. They may have nothing to add. But they may also see no point in saying it.

Can this attitude be practised?

Tobi Lütke describes working consciously on his fear of public speaking by writing down a positive attitude towards it every day. I would not turn his personal account into a scientifically proven method. What interests me is the possibility of observing and changing one's own reaction.

In his metaphor, trust is a battery that communication charges or drains. With warnings, this has a very practical meaning: today's reaction affects the other person's willingness to return tomorrow.

The small pause between an unpleasant feeling and the response can help greatly. What exactly is being claimed? What supports it? Did the person reporting the problem create it, or are they trying to help? The power to decide does not mean we already have all the information we need.

Understanding what lies behind the objection

From mediation, we can borrow the habit of distinguishing a stated position from the interest behind it. “This deadline is impossible” can begin a useful conversation: which task makes it so, what risk do you see, and under what conditions would you commit?

Listening does not transfer the right to make the final decision. It allows that decision to be made with a fuller picture. This matters both for the manager and for the person wondering whether their objection will be seen as an attempt to take charge.

Openness with clear responsibility

In Pixar's Braintrust practice, people with relevant experience discuss a project's weaknesses without being able to impose a particular solution on the person responsible for it. For me, the useful distinction is between the right to name the problem, the opportunity to suggest a change and the responsibility to choose.

This arrangement does not arise merely by gathering people around a table. If an honest opinion is punished after the meeting, the next meeting will be quieter. If every opinion becomes a binding instruction, the person doing the work will lose their own responsibility.

The conversation needs follow-up

After a warning, it matters that the person hears what has been understood, what will be checked and when there will be an answer. If a different direction is chosen, they should know why. Not every suggestion has to be accepted, but a material observation deserves consideration.

One-to-one conversations can help reveal obstacles and workloads that are not visible in the general report. There are boundaries here too: a person should be able to describe a difficulty without unnecessarily exposing their private life.

Where is the point of instability?

What this concept means →

It appears when people still know and speak, but information no longer reaches the decision. This can happen even with a well-intentioned manager if everything depends on their mood and the employee's courage.

A more reliable connection serves both sides. The manager retains the ability to decide, while the team gains a reason to contribute all its knowledge. No one has to be right all the time. What matters is recognising in time when the judgement needs to change.

This material is of a general analytical nature and does not constitute individual legal, tax, financial or investment advice.