WHY FACTS FAIL — AND WHAT REALLY CONVINCES

“True knowledge comes from doubt, not certainty.” – Michel de Montaigne

I was invited by a large company to conduct an intensive training on communication and behavioral language. The setting was what you would expect from high-demand corporate environments: aggressive goals, invisible silos, overburdened leaders, and teams yearning for clarity. Three months after the program, I received a call from the HR director responsible for the initiative. He wanted to share the impacts. But what was supposed to be technical feedback turned into an almost philosophical reflection:

— “Marcello, something profound has changed here. Meetings have stopped being arenas. Conversations flow with more listening, less imposition. Decisions come out with more alignment — and less resistance. What exactly did you do?”

This question lingered in my mind. Because what was done is not simply a set of techniques. It was a silent reconfiguration of how the human brain responds to dialogue.

In a world where communication has become synonymous with information, we forget that influencing is far less about what is said — and much more about how the experience of listening, perception, and reflection is built.

According to the Harvard Business Review, professionals who master the art of constructive persuasion are 73% more likely to lead high-performance teams and close strategic negotiations. But there is one detail often overlooked in leadership manuals: it’s not the volume of data that convinces. It’s the emotional and cognitive architecture of the meeting.

Neuroscience shows us that the human brain reacts with resistance — not openness — when confronted by facts that challenge its beliefs. It protects its narratives as if protecting its very identity. However, studies from the MIT Human Dynamics Laboratory reveal that well-crafted questions activate the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, an area linked to critical reevaluation and self-reflection. This generates a phenomenon called induced self-conviction: the individual, without realizing it, begins to reformulate their own thoughts — without confrontation, without imposition.

Here lies the paradox: the more you try to convince with cold logic, the more resistance you encounter. The more you create space for the other to think for themselves, the more they change — genuinely.

The true art of influencing is not about winning debates. It’s about redesigning the ground where arguments flourish. This is what I’m here to talk about with you today. What this article proposes — and why it goes beyond.

This is not another piece about “assertive communication” or “impactful body language.” It’s a journey beyond clichés — towards a new understanding of influence, language, and human cognition. We’ll explore, in depth and originality:

• Why the brain resists logical arguments — and how that sabotages your ability to make an impact.
• How to use behavioral language to create cognitive and emotional bridges that truly transform.
• Which linguistic structures generate openness, connection, and reframing — without triggering defense mechanisms.
• And most importantly: how to provoke real change without needing to convince anyone.

If you lead, negotiate, teach, or inspire — this content is for you. An invitation to expand your perception and elevate your communicative presence. Here, we go beyond technique.

We enter the territory where language stops being mere speech — and becomes transformation.

The Neuroscience Behind Strategic Questions

True perspective change doesn’t happen through the force of the argument, but through the subtlety of the question. Cognitive neuroscience leaves no doubt: when we are led to reflect on the origin of our own convictions, we initiate a silent — but powerful — process of mental restructuring.

As I mentioned in the introduction, and here I describe the studies conducted by neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga, one of the pioneers of integrated cognition, they reveal that when the human brain is confronted with questions that explore the origin of beliefs or the criteria for their change, specific regions of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex — associated with rational decision-making and judgment review — are activated.

This activation does not occur when we receive data directly, but when we are invited to reconstruct the path that led us to that belief. This is what we call “induced self-reflection”: an internal reevaluation that arises from the question — not from confrontation.

The question “What experiences shaped this conviction?” is not naïve. It’s structured to create a cognitive pause. According to studies from the MIT Human Dynamics Laboratory, such questions reduce the brain’s automatic resistance to what is new or dissonant, reopening neural circuits tied to adaptability and learning.

This practice is also supported by behavioral psychology. Psychologist Albert Ellis (if you’re not familiar, I recommend researching him), the father of Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), argued that cognitive change does not occur when a dysfunctional belief is directly challenged, but when the person is invited to reformulate it based on their own internal evidence.

This is not new. Believe me! Plato already intuited this process in his Socratic dialogues, where maieutics — the “midwifery of ideas” — emerged from provocative questions that led the interlocutor to rediscover hidden truths within themselves.

In corporate practice, we’ve seen this happen. A manager resistant to a strategic change, for example, was not questioned with technical data, but with: “What do you consider indispensable to maintaining team integrity during this transition?” From this question, he began to reframe his position, not because he was convinced — but because he reflected.

Effective influence, therefore, does not lie in telling what is right. It lies in creating mental conditions for the other to discover for themselves what needs to be reconsidered.

Studies Demonstrate the Power of the Socratic Questioning Technique

As I’ve mentioned Plato, I want to dive deeper into this proposal so we can understand that questioning is not just a technique for interaction: it is a philosophy that spans millennia, and it formed the basis for the methodology we now know as coaching. Plato, through Socratic dialogue, taught us that the best answers come when we are prompted to reflect on our own beliefs and reasoning. By questioning others, he was not aiming to impose truths, but challenging the interlocutor to access the truth through introspection and a critical review of their own ideas. The great legacy of this philosophical technique is its lasting impact on contemporary human development practices, such as coaching.

Let me share a case that occurred in 2022 during Siemens’ digital restructuring. Leaders applied the essence of Socratic Questioning in a practical and strategic way, with impressive results. Instead of relying solely on slide presentations or logical arguments, they created space for “mutual investigation.” The exchange of ideas was mediated by questions that invited all involved to deeply reflect on the assumptions supporting their decisions and actions.

The Socratic technique went even further with the use of “unexamined assumptions” matrices, where participants were challenged to question the foundations of their own perceptions before taking any action. Additionally, implementing protocols like the “5 Whys” became an essential practice for exploring the root causes of problems. The technique, initially applied philosophically, found its practical application in a challenging corporate environment, promoting strategic reflection and creating new spaces for understanding.

The impact of this approach was significant: a 40% reduction in executive impasses and a threefold faster adoption of new technologies. This shift to a more reflective and investigative format, where answers were not provided but collectively constructed, produced extraordinary results. Soft persuasion proved more effective than pure argumentation, showing that true transformation happens when people are guided to reformulate their own convictions.

What happened at Siemens embodies what we now see as coaching: the ability, through structured and reflective questions, to unlock insights and provoke internal change in the individual. This helps to understand the magic behind questions. In other words, the connection between Socratic philosophy and coaching is more than a historical link; it is the heart of how real transformations happen. When reflection replaces the imposition of data or the pressure to convince, ideas become more powerful, and changes, more sustainable.

It is in this process of self-discovery and continuous reevaluation that true innovations in human development reside. Unlike a direct teaching model, the Power of the Questioning Technique invites us to question the “whys” behind our actions, beliefs, and choices, helping us become aware of what truly motivates us. This motivation goes beyond desires; it connects to our will, what truly belongs to us. It is not just about pleasure but about purpose. Thus, this is not a passive process; it is an active movement that requires the courage to reevaluate, challenging established norms and expanding consciousness.

Thus, coaching, as a modern practice, becomes a tool that uses strategic questioning to facilitate this transformational process. The coach is not the holder of the truth, but the facilitator of a process where the coachee is invited to explore new perspectives and access internal solutions. By incorporating Socratic questioning into its practice, coaching becomes a journey of self-knowledge, where the simple act of asking opens doors to profound insights and structural changes in how we relate to ourselves and the world around us.

This approach not only results in clearer and more assertive answers but also develops the ability to think critically, adapt quickly to changes, and transform challenges into opportunities. In a dynamic corporate world, this type of cognitive transformation is not just desirable, it is essential. When reflection becomes a pillar of decision-making, the impact goes far beyond a one-off change; it creates a new standard of continuous development, adaptability, and excellence.

The Framework of Strategic Influence

“The man who has a reason to live can bear almost any how.” – Friedrich Nietzsche

Of course, the purpose here is not to discuss coaching, although it plays a vital role in organizational transformation, our focus here is not so much on the specific techniques of coaching, but rather on understanding why facts fail to convince and how to use neuroscience to strategically influence. This is why, instead of following a traditional path of argumentation, I always tell my clients that effective leaders know that true persuasion lies in understanding how the human brain reacts to information, emotions, and interpersonal relationships. Neuroscience provides us with powerful tools to navigate the complexity of corporate decisions without resorting to aggressive or one-sided approaches. Let’s explore how these strategic frameworks can be applied to transform leadership and organizational culture.

1. Disarming the Ego Conflict: Avoiding Automatic Defense

When we seek to prove that we are “right,” we activate a defense mechanism in the brain of the interlocutor, triggering resistance. What happens is the activation of the limbic system, leading to a perceived threat and resistance to change. Instead of confronting, the ideal is to create a collaborative space where ideas are discussed openly and respectfully.

Practical Example: In a planning meeting, a leader could introduce a new strategy by saying, “I understand your position. How can we integrate your vision into our overall plan?” rather than simply imposing their own opinion. This activates collaboration and facilitates an exchange space, minimizing the risk of resistance.

2. Avoiding Fact Rejection: The Reactive Effect of Information Overload

When we overwhelm others with data and information, the brain tends to react defensively. This is the phenomenon of the reactive effect, where an abundance of data may generate the opposite effect of what is desired — reinforcing existing beliefs rather than challenging them.

Practical Example: Instead of dumping graphs and numbers on the effectiveness of a new methodology, how about addressing the issue more subtly? Ask: “How do you see the applicability of this solution in the team’s current context?” or “What factors could make this approach more effective?” This change in approach encourages reflection and fosters a more productive dialogue.

3. Aligning Values: Creating Coherence with Organizational Culture

Our brain constantly seeks a sense of internal coherence. When we make a proposal that aligns with the fundamental values of the organization, the brain perceives it as more plausible and acceptable. This is part of a deep cohesion mechanism, which facilitates the integration of new ideas without resistance.

Practical Example: In a strategic change meeting, instead of presenting a proposal coldly and impersonally, a leader could say, “How does this change reflect our commitment to innovation and continuous development?” This not only aligns the proposal with the organization’s values but also makes it more attractive and easier to accept.

4. The Contagion Effect of Trust: How to Build Emotional Alliances

Trust is one of the most important pillars of leadership. According to neuroscientific studies, trust activates areas of the brain related to pleasure and reward. When people feel confident in their leader, they are more likely to engage and adopt new ideas enthusiastically.

Practical Example: A leader who consistently shares the strategic vision and demonstrates transparency in their decisions creates an emotional connection with the team. This can be evidenced with phrases like: “I trust in the potential of this team, and together we can overcome any challenge.” This type of behavior activates brain regions associated with pleasure and trust-building, increasing collaboration.

5. The “Reflective Question” Technique: Provoking Critical Thinking

Rather than simply giving an answer or imposing a solution, effective leaders can use reflective questions to encourage critical thinking and self-discovery. This activates the prefrontal cortex, an area of the brain associated with analytical thinking and problem-solving.

Practical Example: Instead of directly answering an objection during a planning meeting, the leader could ask: “What, in your opinion, would make this solution more suitable for our current reality?” This approach not only promotes reflection but also empowers the interlocutor, creating an environment of mutual learning.

6. The Art of Active Listening: Reprogramming the Brain for Empathy

Active listening goes beyond merely hearing words. It involves listening with empathy, aiming to understand the underlying emotions and needs. Neuroscience reveals that active listening not only improves communication but also strengthens emotional bonds, making people feel valued and understood.

Practical Example: During a feedback conversation, rather than simply conveying areas for improvement, a leader can reflect on what the employee is trying to express: “I understand that you are facing difficulties in this area, and I would like to explore with you how we can work on this together.” This activates brain areas responsible for empathy, creating an environment of mutual trust and collaboration.

I hope you can perceive that these frameworks, which involve aligning values, being careful about how data is presented, and practicing active listening, are essential for building a leadership that not only influences but also creates lasting changes. Based on neuroscience, we can enhance our leadership approaches, shaping more assertive decisions and creating more resilient and collaborative organizational cultures.

These principles are not just based on theories but on proven data that demonstrate the effectiveness of strategic persuasion. Neuroscience and influence frameworks are undoubtedly the tools that will guide the leaders of the future to a new era of communication, trust, and transformation.

How to Adjust the Influence Strategy

“Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason so few engage in it.” – Henry Ford

A study from the Wharton School revealed a finding that contradicts conventional wisdom: among over 1,200 executives, direct presentation of data showed only 12% effectiveness in persuasion. In contrast, joint exploratory dialogue reached 68%, and questioning assumptions achieved 74% success. These numbers reflect fundamental neuroscientific principles.

When we move away from one-way communication — merely informational — and adopt a collaborative and reflective posture, as I’ve mentioned, we activate the interlocutor’s prefrontal cortex, an area associated with critical thinking and decision-making. The leader’s role shifts from data transmitter to facilitator of reflection, guiding others to think for themselves.

Implementation at 3 Corporate Levels: High-Impact Practices

For Leaders:

• Replace 30% of statements in meetings with catalytic questions. This does not weaken authority but strengthens influence by opening space for collaboration. Questions activate brain areas linked to problem-solving and reinforce the leader’s image as a guide.

Example: Instead of asserting a strategy, ask: “How does this approach align with our team’s values?” or “What challenges do you anticipate, and how can we address them together?”

• Implement “Reverse Assumption Weeks”: teams should defend views opposite to the usual, fostering a culture of questioning and innovation. Challenging assumptions strengthens confidence in decisions and stimulates strategic thinking.

For Negotiators:

• “Conditional Yes” Technique: Replace “Do you agree?” with “If we agree on [criteria], how does that change your position?” This approach expands cognitive flexibility and avoids resistance, generating alignment without imposition.

For Innovation:

• Create “Idea Courts”: replace pitches with evaluations based on questions. The idea is tested, not defended, which activates critical cognition and enhances decision quality and the culture of innovation.

Building a Conscious Decision-Making Environment

As we’ve seen, neuroscience confirms that questions and collaboration not only increase acceptance of ideas but also create an environment of more rational decision-making. The goal is no longer to convince but to build shared understanding and sustainable decisions.

With this, neuroscience shifts from theory to a practical tool for more effective, human, and transformative leadership. By adjusting influence strategies based on the brain’s response to data, questions, and challenges, we promote a mindset shift and organizational impact.

These practices go beyond what is taught in business schools, offering paths for those who want to be agents of transformation. Let’s take a look:
Neurostrategic Application in 5 Dimensions of the Organization

1. Reflective Leadership: The Power of Cognitive Gaps
Effective leaders ask questions that provoke others to reflect.

• Practice: Conclude meetings with “stay questions”: “What will you take from this meeting to apply tomorrow?”
• Foundation: Activates the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, enhancing retention and engagement.

2. Creative Counterpoint Design: Productive Tensions
Innovative organizations value the smart friction between ideas.

• Practice: Promote “Reversed Debates,” where leaders argue for ideas they don’t believe in.
• Foundation: Activates empathy and cognitive flexibility, reducing confirmation bias.

3. Neuroagreement Negotiation: Synchronization Before Persuasion

• Practice: Start with “Mapping Shared Beliefs.”
• Example: “Before we move forward, what makes sense to both of us?”
• Foundation: Releases oxytocin and reduces amygdala activity, creating emotional openness.

4. Argumentative Experimentation Culture: The Laboratory of Moving Ideas

Here, it’s essential to explore further because in high-complexity environments, prematurely fixating on a single idea can inhibit collective creative potential. Instead, neurostrategic leaders treat ideas as verbal prototypes — hypotheses that take shape, are stressed, and refined in real time.

• Practice: During brainstorming or project review meetings, encourage participants to present ideas with statements like: “This is an initial version… What improvements do you see?” or “Let’s test this hypothesis before deciding.”
This approach reduces fear of judgment and increases the willingness for co-creation.
• Foundation: By reducing identity attachment to ideas, there’s less amygdala activation (linked to threat and rejection) and more engagement of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, responsible for evaluating alternatives and flexible thinking. This promotes a safe environment for failure, testing, and learning, essential for genuine innovation.

5. Emotional Strategic Alignment: The Connection That Sustains Execution

It’s also worth exploring further because while data, arguments, and analyses are crucial, on their own, they don’t mobilize. Execution only gains traction when emotional alignment is achieved — when there is a perceived collective purpose and a reason that resonates with the team’s “whys.”

• Practice: When communicating goals or changes, begin with the human and cultural impact before delving into metrics. Phrases like “What does this goal mean for our purpose as a team?” or “How can this improve the experience of those we serve?” reinforce meaning and belonging.
• Foundation: Emotional engagement activates the limbic system, especially the nucleus accumbens and the anterior cingulate cortex, regions involved in motivation and sense of purpose. When there is coherence between reason and emotion, adherence to strategies is deeper, and resilience in the face of obstacles is stronger.

Leadership That Thinks with the Head, Feels with the Heart, and Acts with Systemic Awareness

“The only way to deal with this unfree world is to become completely free, which is, in essence, to act as if you were already free.” – Jean-Paul Sartre

The leadership of the future — and the present — will not just be an occupied function, but an applied intelligence: sensitive to the invisible, clear in the face of complexity, and courageous in the face of the unknown.

Neurostrategy is not an academic fad, but a new epistemology of action. It invites us to lead with a brain expanded by multiple lenses: behavioral, emotional, relational, adaptive, and sensory. Rather than ready-made manuals, it demands presence. Instead of formulas, it requires listening. Instead of control, it demands trust in living systems.

When we understand that decisions are not only logical but deeply psychoaffective, we stop managing people as gears and begin orchestrating human movements with ecological intelligence. Leadership then becomes an act of permission: creating space for ideas to breathe, emotions to be metabolized, and talents to flourish.

In times of uncertainty, neurostrategic leadership is the bridge between the complexity of the world and the simplicity of the essential.

Because, in the end, it’s not about controlling chaos, but about dancing with it — with intention, listening, and purpose.

The Culture of Questioning as a Competitive Differentiator

Now, we are at a crucial moment of rethinking life and everything we’ve created to live better. In other words, as Artificial Intelligence and data become key pieces in decision-making processes within organizations, the true competitive frontier will no longer be about the volume of information, but about the quality of the questions asked. Therefore, the culture of questioning emerges as the new competitive differentiator. In a world that is increasingly dynamic and unpredictable, where the speed of adaptation and the complexity of problems are the greatest barriers to success, organizations that embrace a culture of mutual investigation and continuous learning will be ahead of their competitors, not only because of their strategy execution but also because of how they build and transform their narratives.

These companies have an invisible advantage in three fundamental pillars:

• Strategic Adaptation Speed: The ability to question data in real time and generate actionable insights quickly.
• Retention of Complex Cognitive Talents: Professionals who are challenged to think critically and propose innovative solutions.
• Organizational Resilience: Organizations that understand failure is just feedback, not an end.

Why Facts Speak, But Don’t Convince

“Facts fail because they are devoid of the human soul that needs to be touched, inspired, and transformed by reason. They are merely pieces of a puzzle, not the entirety of the story.”
– Marcello de Souza

When we talk about influence, we’re not just referring to the ability to persuade with data and evidence. The true power of persuasion comes from a deep understanding of human psychology — and, consequently, our emotional and subjective nature. Data may be convincing, but what truly moves individuals and organizations are the narratives built from the questions we ask.

And here I return to Plato: “True wisdom comes from the ability to question what we think we already know.” To complement the philosopher: the truth is, we just think we know, right? Therefore, it is in the act of questioning that strategic influence is born — not in providing ready-made answers. The way questions are asked directs attention, reshapes priorities, and reframes values. By asking the right questions, you begin to shape answers, generate insights, and ultimately, persuade.

This is neuroscience applied to persuasion: we know our brains make emotional decisions before considering logic, and the right questions can evoke emotions that, in turn, lead to assertive decisions.

“A mind that opens to a new idea never returns to its original size.”
– Albert Einstein

If you’ve made it this far, but at your next strategic meeting you forget everything you’ve read, at least do the minimum: ask yourself — how often did you ask before you stated? Make this your new leadership ritual:

• Count how many genuine questions are asked during the meeting.
• Measure the ratio between questions and assertions.
• Try the “3 Questions Before the Argument” protocol — a simple yet powerful method to transform the flow of conversation.

By embracing a culture that makes sense of “Why Facts Fail — And What Truly Convinces,” your ability to influence and guide your team will become more effective, persuasive, and human-centered. True leadership lies in mastering the behavioral art: a practice of cognitive, emotional, and strategic intelligence.

Above all, never forget: true influence doesn’t come from having all the answers, but from knowing how to ask the right questions. In a corporate world increasingly driven by data and artificial intelligence, the organizations that will stand out are those that master the art of strategic questioning.

Creating a culture of questions is not just about challenging the status quo. It’s about liberating thought, cultivating curiosity, and strengthening the sense of intellectual belonging. It’s about generating a living, collective, and authentic intelligence — one that evolves alongside its leaders and teams.

Because in the end, facts speak,
but only the right questions truly move us.

To lead is to ask with purpose.
It is to touch with words what data cannot reach.
It is to influence with soul what reason alone cannot transform.

And that… no machine will ever be able to do for you.

#marcellodesouza #marcellodesouzaoficial #coachingevoce #neurostrategy #consciousleadership #behavioraldevelopment #emotionalintelligence #purposefulleadership #socialpsychology #learningculture