Catching Intelligence [Part 3 of 5]

I used to think the loudest voice was the most confident. (Turns out I had it backwards.)

The person talking the most in your meeting probably knows the least about the problem.

I've seen this pattern everywhere... more often than not.

The real expert sits quietly while someone with surface knowledge fills the air with confident explanations.

Why?

Because real expertise comes with awareness of complexity...

The more you know, the more you know you don't know.

We've built meeting cultures that reward volume over insight.

The loudest person gets heard... the thoughtful person gets overlooked. The team makes decisions based on confidence, not competence.

Here's what happens in high-performing teams:

They create space for quiet intelligence.

The best insights come from people who think before they speak, consider multiple angles, and see the complications others miss.

These people often have something more valuable than just being correct about the facts. (They're useful, not just right.)

They need an invitation, not interruption.

They distinguish between confidence and competence.

Loud doesn't mean right... quick doesn't mean smart... the person who immediately knows the answer probably doesn't understand the question.

They ask different questions.

Instead of "What should we do?" they ask "What are we missing?"

Instead of "Who has the answer?" they ask "Who sees the problem differently?"

(The questions matter more than having immediate answers.)

I’m thinking about ending meetings with this question...

"What didn't we talk about that we should have?"

Why?

I want to uncover what is still quiet... I want the real issues to surface... I want the obvious solutions to get questioned.

The intelligence is always there... we just need to amplify it.

Remember those human error signals from Part 2? The valuable ones usually come from people who speak last, not first.

What insights are you missing because you're listening to the loudest voice?