The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
Albert Einstein
As a first-year student at orientation in a large room filled with hundreds of other aspiring lawyers, one thing stuck with me. The dean explained that the foremost important thing to frame our thinking and conduct was to be skeptical, because skeptics make the best lawyers: They are rarely fooled or taken advantage of by clients or other lawyers.
I filed it away in the deep recess of my mind. After several years in practice, I realized my inherent nature was to trust people until proven otherwise. Some would say I was gullible. Of course, I was burned a few times, thankfully never seriously. My cousin Dukie had an expression; “Cousin Bobby, sometimes we get beat.” I adopted this with a shrug, learning to move on.
After decades of lawyering, I finally reconciled and integrated the admonishment to be skeptical by framing it in more positive terms. Be more curious. Curiosity is integral to being skeptical. They are two prongs on the same fork. When we are skeptical, we are doubtful. Skeptics challenge the status quo. Doubt is another word for uncertainty. We address doubt and uncertainty most effectively with … well … curiosity. Curiosity launches the quest to reduce doubt and uncertainty. New facts, arguments and insights make us less skeptical and allow more confident decision-making. Had the learned law dean framed it that way years ago, I would have embraced the concept sooner and easier. I may have even gotten “beat” less often!
Interested in learning more? Check out ALI CLE’s upcoming webcast, UCC Update 2025: Key Decisions and Emerging Trends, on April 14, 2025!
The Nature of Curiosity
Academic literature is clear that curiosity is key to learning. We all are more likely to retain information when motivated by curiosity. Curiosity is the mind’s doorway to learning. Our brain is rewarded when we solve a problem or accrue knowledge.
The nature of curiosity as a trait, emotion and tool has been researched in a variety of contexts. In 2018, a group of researchers published an article in the Harvard Business Review collating research on curiosity. They proposed a five-dimensional model of curiosity summarized as follows:
- Deprivation sensitivity — seeking relief by filling a gap in knowledge.
- Joyous exploration — a pleasurable state exploring the diversity of the world and humanity.
- Social curiosity — talking, listening and observing others, which may include snooping, eavesdropping and gossiping.
- Stress tolerance — a willingness to accept and even harness the anxiety associated with novelty.
- Thrill-seeking — a willingness to take physical, social and financial risks to acquire varied, complex and intense experiences, with the anxiety of confronting novelty as something to be amplified, not reduced.
Research has identified some key benefits resulting from the triggering of curiosity:
- Deeper and more rational thinking
- More creative solutions
- Fewer decision-making errors
- Reduced group conflict
- Less defensive reactions to stress
- Less aggressive reactions to provocation
- More open communication
- Improved team performance
- Earned trust from asking questions
- Others viewing us as more competent, not less, by us listening to their responses
- The promotion of more creative outcomes through listening.
It is challenging to reframe and apply the research, theories and concepts of curiosity to the practice of law, but, in my view, when we embrace curiosity, we become better lawyers.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education.
Albert Einstein
Undermining Curiosity
Harvard University professor Francesca Gino has studied curiosity and its value to learning and leadership. In a 2018 article, she states: “A body of research demonstrates that framing work around learning goals (developing competence, acquiring skills, mastering new situations and so on) rather than performance goals (hitting targets, proving our competence, impressing others) boosts motivation. And when motivated by learning goals, we acquire more diverse skills, do better at work, get higher grades in college, do better on problem solving tasks and receive higher ratings after training.”
One view of law school is that the Socratic method, other teaching formats and the emphasis on detailed rules of procedure and precedent stifle creativity. Curiosity drives innovative thinking and optimal decision-making. Instead, law students and young lawyers are often criticized for “not thinking like a lawyer.”
Interested in learning more? Check out ALI CLE’s upcoming webcast, Land Use Law Restated: Zoning in a Decentralized System, on April 16, 2025!
Likewise, novice lawyers are indoctrinated into an existing structure of practice formats, forms and computerized data entry involving box-checking rather than thinking outside the proverbial box. I believe we get “boxed-in” as young lawyers to the ways and means of our positions and mentors. With the almighty billable hour, there is little incentive to deviate from the repetitive tasks that undermine critical and creative reflection. Clients, rightfully so, do not want to pay lawyers to go off the beaten path to a dead end. There are enormous structural pressures that suppress curiosity. Exploration and innovation are sacrificed on the altar of efficiency.
In addition to concerns that time is precious, Professor Gino notes that people refrain from asking questions due to fear of being judged incompetent, indecisive or unintelligent.
CLICK HERE to read the full article.
To find our more about ALI CLE’s in-person courses or webcasts, or to check out on-demand CLE, click here.