Companies, like the rest of society, are increasingly becoming arenas for polarized debates. This phenomenon is often explained by individuals’ tendency to engage with people or content that confirm their views, thereby reinforcing their beliefs. However, a recent study by Daniel Mochon and Janet Schwartz, published in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, explores a less frequently discussed mechanism: exposure to opposing opinions.
The authors analysed the behaviour of over 500,000 Facebook users who were shown posts that either aligned with or contradicted their political beliefs. The result: people were more likely to click on and comment on content that challenged their views than content that reinforced them. Follow-up experiments showed this behaviour also extended to non-political topics. According to the authors, disagreement triggers indignation, which becomes an even stronger driver of engagement than agreement.
These findings are relevant for leaders aiming to implement organizational change. When employees are invited to speak up, those who are most outraged tend to be the most vocal, which can create an exaggerated sense of opposition. This can also lead to roadblocks if the message is perceived as threatening or moralizing. The authors recommend careful framing of sensitive communications to reduce reactions of indignation. Better understanding these dynamics can help anticipate resistance and sustain constructive dialogue—even in disagreement.