In today’s fast-moving, interconnected organisations, the most effective leaders are not always those with the fastest answers. More often, they are the ones asking the better questions.
Curiosity is increasingly being recognised as a defining leadership capability. Not curiosity as a personality quirk, but a deliberate habit of thinking. In environments shaped by disruption and complexity, leaders who approach uncertainty with questions rather than assumptions, build stronger trust, make better decisions and create space for innovation. As one recent leadership insight put it, “Curiosity isn’t just for cats, it’s a leadership superpower that too often gets overlooked.”
In fact, the absence of curiosity can have very real consequences. In a recent Royal Commission, the Public Service Commissioner stated plainly: “Curiosity should be a default setting for public servants.” It is a powerful reminder that incuriosity at the top can ripple widely and painfully.
So what does curiosity actually look like in practice?
Imagine a leadership team facing a significant strategic pivot, entering a new market, restructuring a function, or responding to an unexpected regulatory change. Some leaders instinctively move to solutions. Others pause. They ask: What are we not seeing? Who has a different perspective? What assumptions are we making? That pause is not hesitation; it is discipline. Curious leaders create space for dialogue because they understand that clarity often emerges through conversation, not command.
There is also a strong connection between curiosity and psychological safety. When people feel safe to speak up, challenge ideas and admit mistakes, performance improves. Amy Edmondson, who first defined psychological safety, describes it as “a belief that no one will be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes, and that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking”.
Yet many workplaces still struggle to create this environment. Recent international research[1] shows that only 50% of workers say their managers create psychological safety for their teams, and 63% of workers don’t feel safe sharing their opinions at work. In that context, a leader’s curiosity, demonstrated through listening, inviting challenge and responding constructively, becomes a tangible lever for performance and retention.
Self-awareness is the hinge between inquiry and impact. A leader who can openly describe a decision they misjudged, and what they learned, signals reflection and growth. One senior executive we worked with shared how an early career market entry failed. At the time, it would have been easy to blame external conditions. Instead, they recognised that they had not invited sufficient internal challenge. In subsequent roles, they intentionally built teams empowered to question assumptions. The result was not only stronger performance, but deeper engagement. That shift began with curiosity about their own leadership.
There is also a broader cultural dimension. Research highlights that curious managers uplift their teams, while incurious managers can stifle them. Yet there is an intellectual paradox: many leaders claim to value curiosity, but fear that too many questions will slow execution or increase risk. The evidence suggests the opposite. Decision-making becomes more rational with higher curiosity, adaptability increases, and leaders who display curiosity are more respected and energise their teams.
In today’s environment, this matters beyond internal culture. Senior decision makers increasingly value thoughtful, experience-based insight. Three in four decision makers say they are more likely to trust a company’s thought leadership than traditional marketing materials when judging its capabilities. Trust, whether inside or outside the organisation, is built when leaders demonstrate depth of thinking rather than surface certainty.
Curious leadership is not soft. It is not indecisive. It is active, intentional and future facing. It requires the confidence to admit you do not have all the answers, the humility to invite challenge, and the discipline to listen before responding. It asks leaders to move from Why did you do this? to How did we get here? shifting from blame to shared learning.
If we are serious about building future-fit leadership teams, we need to look beyond track record and technical capability. We need to listen for how leaders think. Do they describe evolving their perspective over time? Do they actively seek dissenting views? Do they create environments where others feel safe to question them?
At TRANSEARCH, these are precisely the kinds of qualities we explore when assessing leadership potential. Curiosity, psychological safety and self-awareness are not abstract ideals; they are practical capabilities that shape performance, culture and long-term impact. If this is a conversation you are having in your organisation, I would welcome the opportunity to explore how we can support you in identifying and developing leaders who ask better questions and, in doing so, lead better.
[1] Why Intellectual Curiosity Is Good For Your Career, Michelle Bennet, 7 July 2022 https://www.niagarainstitute.com/blog/intellectual-curiosity/
Sandra has in excess of 30 years recruitment and consulting experience within the Health and Human Services sectors across Australia, and internationally in New Zealand and America. She complements her consulting career with industry experience where she worked in a senior Human Resources Leadership role in a major teaching hospital in Boston. Well known for her consultative approach, Sandra has developed a reputation as a leading industry specialist, having placed a range of CEOs and senior executives across the sectors and facilitated initiatives including talent acquisition, talent management and organisational excellence. Read more…
