Opinions are simply a person’s point of view on a particular subject, situation, or person. They are perceptions, not hard facts. Because they are inherently subjective, there is technically no objective “right” or “wrong” when it comes to an opinion—only different shades of perspective.
However, a common human tendency is to portray our opinions as absolute truths, and listeners frequently mistake them as such. While opinions are meant to be spoken—and are arguably one of the best ways to keep a conversation alive and vibrant—as leaders, we must ask ourselves a deeper question: What is our true intention when we express the opinions we hold?
When we engage in conversation, we are ostensibly sharing knowledge. What we share may be embraced by the listener or completely overlooked. When an opinion is accepted, it creates a “mutual agreement”—the golden state of collaboration. But getting someone to that point is rarely easy. Not everyone is ready to “buy” what you are “selling.” In every team and every boardroom, there are always “tough nuts to crack” who seem resistant to any view that isn’t their own.
To understand this dynamic better, let’s look at two different scenarios regarding mutual agreement, using the lens of a common passion: cricket.
Situation 1: The Open Perspective
Imagine you are talking to a friend about the legacy of M.S. Dhoni. You express your deep admiration for his leadership and composure. Your friend, perhaps playing devil’s advocate, immediately retorts by focusing only on the player’s technical shortcomings or a recent dip in strike rate.
Instead of getting defensive or raising your voice, you take your friend on a journey through Dhoni’s expertise. You highlight both his on-field tactical brilliance and his off-field persona as a mentor. Your opinion here is a culmination of the knowledge you have gathered over years of watching the game. As you deliberate calmly, your friend—who perhaps hadn’t considered the “mental” side of the captaincy—begins to shift their perception. In this case, you have successfully influenced your friend. You created a ground for mutual agreement because you provided missing information that their mind was ready to receive.
Situation 2: The Closed Door
Now, let us tweak the scenario slightly. This time, the subject is Virat Kohli. You begin glorifying Kohli’s unprecedented achievements and his aggressive, winning mindset. But this time, your friend shoots down every single statement you make before you even finish your sentence.
In the first situation, your friend lacked certain information and was fundamentally open to changing their thought process. But here, your friend’s opinion of Kohli is already a culmination of “pros and cons” they have gathered from their own sources. They have already done the “math,” and their conclusion is set. You both hold strong, divided points of view that are rooted in your personal values.
Despite your best attempt to build a ground for agreement, your friend has a closed mindset. They are absolutely reluctant to take your opinion. This is the moment where “sharing” turns into “selling.” If you continue to push, you aren’t trying to inform them; you are trying to defeat them.
Sharing vs. Selling: What’s the Difference?
The line between sharing and selling is often invisible to the speaker, but it is glaringly obvious to the listener.
- You Share an Opinion when you maintain an open mind. You respect the other person’s point of view as a valid “9” to your “6.” You add your own perspective not to replace theirs, but to provide a “bigger picture.” You offer your perspective as a gift that can be either taken or dropped without any hard feelings. It is an invitation to a dialogue.
- You Sell an Opinion when you become intellectually inflexible. You talk only about what you want to talk about and refuse to truly listen to the counter-narrative. You simply “unload” your perspective onto the listener, demanding they accept it. Selling is an act of intellectual aggression; it is an attempt to occupy the other person’s mental space.
The Root Cause: Ego vs. Intellect
If you think that positive opinions are “shared” and negative ones are “sold,” you are mistaken. The valence of the opinion doesn’t matter. The difference lies entirely in the source of the thought:
1. The Intellect (Sharing): When your opinion comes from your intellect and your desire for understanding, you SHARE it. The intellect is curious. It knows it doesn’t have all the facts. It views a conversation as a laboratory where two people can mix their ideas to find a better solution. When you share from the intellect, you are okay with being proven wrong, because you value the “Right Answer” more than “Being Right.”
2. The Ego (Selling): When your opinion comes from your ego and your emotions, you SELL it. The ego is fragile. It views a disagreement as a personal attack. To the ego, an unaccepted opinion feels like a loss of status. Therefore, it doubles down. It uses “volume” instead of “logic.” It uses “repetition” instead of “relevance.” When you sell from the ego, you are no longer interested in the truth; you are only interested in validation.
The Leadership Cost of “Selling”
In a management context, “selling” your opinion is a dangerous habit. When a leader “sells,” they inadvertently create a “Yes-Man” culture. Team members quickly learn that disagreeing with the leader’s ego is a losing battle, so they stop offering their own intellect.
As a leader, you might walk away from a meeting thinking you “convinced” everyone because they all nodded in agreement. But in reality, you didn’t convince them; you simply exhausted them. They didn’t “buy” your opinion; they just stopped “bidding” against your ego. This leads to poor decision-making because the leader is effectively operating in a vacuum, deprived of the collective intelligence of the team.
Shifting the Narrative: How to Stay in “Sharing” Mode
To ensure you are influencing rather than just “selling,” try these three shifts in your next high-stakes conversation:
- Check Your “Why”: Before you speak, ask yourself: Am I saying this to help the project succeed, or am I saying this to show that I am the smartest person in the room? If the answer is the latter, stay silent.
- The “Drop-Test”: Present your opinion and then intentionally leave a silence. If the other person ignores the point or moves in a different direction, let it go. If your intellect is in charge, you won’t mind. If your ego is in charge, you will feel a “pinch” of irritation. That pinch is your signal that you’ve started selling.
- Validate the Resistance: If someone shoots down your opinion, don’t repeat yourself. Instead, ask: “That’s an interesting pushback. What part of my logic feels off to you?” This pulls the conversation back from “Ego vs. Ego” to “Intellect vs. Intellect.”
A Task for You
As you go through your week—whether you are in a boardroom, a family dinner, or a casual tea-time chat—I leave you with this challenge:
Think of the last few conversations you had where a disagreement arose. Reflect honestly on your internal state during those moments. Were you sharing your knowledge to build a bridge of understanding, or were you trying to sell your ego to win a point?
Influence is a quiet power that draws people toward your vision. Ego is a loud noise that eventually drives them away. Choose to share. Choose to listen. Choose to lead with your intellect, and let the “sales pitch” of the ego fall silent.
Leave a Reply