Invite input explicitly and specifically

Ask for candid input on a specific topic — not "any thoughts?" but "where do you see this plan failing?"

Why it works

General invitations ("any questions?") carry an implicit norm that questions are tolerated but not actively sought; in most teams, silence is the default response. Specific, diagnostic questions signal that a genuine answer is wanted and valued, lower the ambiguity about what would be acceptable to say, and model that scrutiny is welcome rather than threatening. The more senior the asker, the stronger this signal.

How to do it

1. Replace "Any thoughts?" with a pointed question: "What is the weakest part of this plan?"
2. Ask by name in a way that makes the question a compliment of expertise, not a cold call.
3. Follow up with genuine curiosity, not defensiveness — your reaction to the first honest answer sets the tone for every subsequent one.
4. After a meeting, thank individuals specifically who raised a challenging point.

Evidence

The specific framing of invitations to speak up is identified in Edmondson’s work and subsequent research as a leader behavior that predicts candor. Diagnostic invitations are more effective than open ones because they reduce ambiguity about what is safe to say. (observational)

Evidence is largely correlational from survey-based studies; the causal mechanism is plausible and consistent but not isolated in a controlled experiment.

Common mistake

Asking "what do you think?" immediately after fully explaining your position — which frames any disagreement as opposition rather than as the input you ostensibly wanted.