What to do when you assume everyone thinks like you?

What is the false-consensus effect?

The false-consensus effect is a cognitive shortcut where people take their own choices and opinions as the social norm. We treat our reactions as typical even when they are not. The term dates back to research by Ross, Greene and House in 1977. The mechanism works quietly: we assume our responses are natural for others. It saves mental effort and supports belonging — assuming others agree makes it easier to feel part of a group. When our behaviour seems different, we may fear exclusion, which further pushes us to assume similarity. The effect appears in ordinary people and leaders alike. Leaders can be more vulnerable because their role and influence encourage confidence in their own perspective. Saying "everyone thinks like this" often replaces real consultation and can lead to imposing solutions that only fit a personal viewpoint. Practically, decisions made without verified input create risks: poor fit with real needs, lower performance, or harm. Recognising the effect is the first step toward changing leadership behaviour.

Why do leaders fall into it?

Leaders fall into this trap for a few reasons. First, admitting ignorance can feel like weakness; saying "I don't know" in public risks losing authority, so many prefer to assume they are right. Second, the curse of knowledge makes it hard to remember what non-experts don’t know. Experts forget their starting point and omit crucial context, which results in unclear instructions and insufficient support. Research indicates that the more someone identifies with their role, the more they trust their own judgments — reinforcing false consensus among experienced managers. Performance pressure and the need to decide quickly also favour automatic thinking over inquiry. Without space for questions or dissent, leaders act on untested assumptions and biases. That stifles ideas, reduces critical feedback and lowers decision quality. Spotting these dynamics helps leaders introduce checks and probing questions.

Consequences for the team and the business

The effects of false consensus show up fast in day-to-day work. Neurodiverse employees may struggle in environments designed for the majority. New hires find it harder when informal rules are treated as universal. Jokes or coping strategies a leader uses can unintentionally hurt others and raise tensions. Assuming everyone works at the same pace leads to overload, lower engagement and higher turnover. Poor communication and lack of clear guidance reduce task quality. Organizations lose ideas when many suggestions never get heard. Wrong assumptions also create harmful communication patterns. Weak team relationships increase burnout risk, and financial consequences appear as lower productivity and higher hiring costs. To counteract this, invest in systemic communication and development: training and routines that teach differentiating personal assumptions from actual needs. Only then can a team fully benefit from its members' potential.

How to recognise your mistake

Spotting your own error means watching team reactions closely. Silence instead of constructive criticism is a red flag. Look for drops in engagement or rising error rates. If newcomers withdraw quickly, ask whether onboarding pace is too fast. If jokes or ideas hurt someone, address it and clarify. A lack of questions in meetings does not equal agreement — it can mask fear of speaking up. Repeated requests for clarification often point to the curse of knowledge. A practical test is to ask someone to explain a task in their own words. Regular anonymous surveys surface hidden opinions and expectations. Watch work tempo and signs of fatigue — they reveal realistic capacity. When decisions trigger unexpected performance dips, return to your assumptions and ask for concrete examples of problems. Admitting “I may be wrong” is hard but essential; recognizing the mistake is a major step toward improvement.

How to act differently

Start from curiosity rather than certainty. Think like a scientist: form hypotheses, don't declare final judgments. Instead of announcing a solution, ask: how do you see this and what are the alternatives? Turn statements into open questions and welcome dissent. Hold short one-on-one conversations before presenting ideas to a larger group to avoid imposing a single perspective. Simplify instructions and check understanding by asking team members to repeat tasks in their own words. Use plain language, avoid jargon and fill in missing context. Create regular feedback mechanisms and anonymous channels for concerns. Put procedures in place that require consultation for major choices. Training and practical exercises help dismantle assumptions — so include communication training in development programs. A leader who admits uncertainty models courage and invites honest input. Over time, openness yields better decisions, lower attrition and higher performance. Team members' ideas stand a better chance of being heard and implemented. It requires practice, but the results are clear and lasting.

False consensus is a common leadership error: thinking others feel and act as you do. It stems from belonging needs, fear of showing ignorance and the curse of knowledge. Consequences include lower performance, team harm and lost ideas. Recognising symptoms takes observation and open questions. Good practice includes private check-ins, simple instructions and regular feedback. Thinking like a researcher and welcoming opposing views strengthens leaders and teams. Deliberate action reduces the bias and improves relationships and outcomes.

Empatyzer in practice: how to fight false consensus

Empatyzer helps leaders limit the false-consensus effect by supplying tools to verify assumptions. Before rolling out a change, leaders can quickly gather concise team input via anonymous channels the tool offers. A 24/7 AI assistant suggests phrasing tailored to personality and organizational context, making it easier to ask the right questions rather than assume consensus. Empatyzer delivers short micro-lessons twice a week to train managers on control questions and simple comprehension checks. A professional personality diagnosis highlights where a leader is most vulnerable to the curse of knowledge and which messages lack clarity. In practice the process goes: diagnose risks, the assistant proposes wording for 1:1s, short conversations happen, and the tool monitors engagement shifts. That reduces guesswork and enforces collecting empirical signals before decisions. Empatyzer also accounts for different ways of working, lowering the risk of overload or harm from a one-size-fits-all approach. Communication becomes more concrete, misunderstandings decrease and feedback improves. Short procedures and regular reflection help cement new communication habits in the team.